The Prestonwood Baptist Church of Plano, TX, (a Dallas suburb) led by Dr. Jack Graham, a former President of the Southern Baptist Convention, has determined to escrow funds totaling $1 million, that were previously designated for the Cooperative Program—the premier funding mechanism of the Southern Baptist Convention’s agencies— because of positions and policies taken by Dr. Russell Moore, President of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. Other predominately White Southern Baptist Churches are also threatening to withhold Cooperative Program funds surrounding public positions taken by Russell Moore and the ERLC.
Consequently, the Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention has decided to investigate and explore the depths of why some churches aren’t giving and the best way to address the whole matter. They want to keep churches giving to the Cooperative Program while seeking a peaceful solution to the reactions to Russell Moore’s policies and position. Because of the Executive Committee’s approach to resolving this matter comprehensively, inevitably, the investigation will require determining the compatibility of Moore’s statements with the values, beliefs, and convictions of Southern Baptists.
Additionally, the Louisiana Baptist Convention has called for an investigation specifically targeting Dr. Moore. They are hostile toward Dr. Moore and would like to see him gone. Dr. Fred Luter, the first African-American President of the Southern Baptist Convention, who pastors the largest Southern Baptist Convention church in Louisiana, and Pastor David Crosby of First Baptist New Orleans have signed a statement vigorously dissenting to the Louisiana Convention’s call for an investigation of Dr. Moore.
The outcome of this investigation will speak volumes to Black Southern Baptist Convention Churches as to whether or not any church leader or entity head who publically, critically evaluate President Donald Trump will be welcome in the Southern Baptist Convention and eligible to serve in any and all levels of denominational life.
If Russell Moore cannot give a candid evaluation of Donald Trump without being publicly humiliated and without White Churches withdrawing and threatening to withdraw funds, and the Southern Baptist Convention and a state affiliate, launching an investigation, I pity the Black SBC officeholder who would dare whisper a word of disagreement on a Trump statement or action.
Before increasing Cooperative Program gifts or affiliating with the Southern Baptist Convention, Black Baptist Churches may want to consider awaiting the Executive Committee’s investigation results regarding Russell Moore. Why am I singling out Black Churches to take a cautionary attitude toward supporting the Cooperative Program pending the outcome of this investigation? Why am I encouraging Black Baptist Churches who are considering affiliating with the Southern Baptist Convention to take a probative and aggressive approach to understanding the dynamics, roots, results and implications of the investigation before affiliating?
Estimates are over 80 percent of White evangelicals supported presidential candidate Donald Trump. Russell Moore did not support Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump for President. In keeping with his responsibilities as the designated prophetic voice to Southern Baptists and the nation on ethics issues, Moore gave critical, ethical evaluations of both candidates. However, it was his critique of Trump that has caused a tremendous backlash that appears to be potentially as divisive as the “inerrancy battle” in SBC life that birth the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship and consequently tremendously weakened the numerical, financial, and more importantly, the missionary strength of the Southern Baptist Convention.
The implications of such an investigation are clear, and the outcome will speak volumes to Black Southern Baptist Churches, and the Convention as a whole. History has proven that God often places prophetic voices in a community to lovingly and authoritatively challenge the powers-that-be on controversial moral, ethical, spiritual and political concerns.
Why such huge implications for Blacks in the Southern Baptist Convention? It is because the vast majority of Black Southern Baptist Convention Church leaders and pastors and future potential entity heads are not Trump-leaning, blindly loyal Republican voters. The majority of Black Baptist Church leaders would agree with Moore’s assessment of Trump, wholeheartedly. Therein lies the potential for the outcome of this investigation to be tremendously and racially polarizing.
There has never been a minority entity head in the history of the Southern Baptist Convention. Until the advent of Frank Page in recent years as President of the Executive Committee of the Southern Baptist Convention, the highest ranking Black person working on staff at the seven-story Southern Baptist Convention Executive Building in Nashville, TN, was the head custodian.
If the Executive Committee’s investigation results in reprimanding, marginalizing, or firing Russell Moore—the message being sent is strict adherence to Republican Party loyalty is absolutely necessary to be elected as an entity head and to maintain one’s position in SBC organizational life. The implications of the Executive Committee’s investigative report is staggering and could be tantamount to an earthquake in the Convention. If Moore is marginalized or fired, 80-90 percent of Southern Baptist Black Churches who share Moore’s views on President Trump, would also simultaneously feel as if their political convictions regarding the current President of the United States would also be officially reprimanded, rejected and rebuked by the Southern Baptist Convention. Unintended consequences as a result of this shortsighted investigative decision should be weighed by the Executive Committee before they render a verdict. The attempt to mute a respected voice amongst us is plainly a step in the wrong direction.
The investigation was triggered because Prestonwood Church in Dallas announced on February 16 that it was escrowing $1 million in Cooperative Program funds. Mike Buster, Executive Pastor for Prestonwood, explained why:
A Southern Baptist layman and attorney in private practice in Nashville, TN, sums up the roots of the Moore controversy in a comment stream at SBC Voices (He blogs using the name “Louis”):
“This goes beyond last year’s election. It also involves ERLC initiatives on things such as immigration and race. Sometimes, as on immigration, there are real differences of opinion. The ERLC has gone on record as having a very convictional view of the immigration issue. I suspect that position and the policy prescription advocated by the ERLC is very different than most common folks in the SBC. On that issue, and others, I suspect the ERLC is going to have to pull back.”
“I believe that Dr. Moore and the ERLC may handle racial issues differently from some Southern Baptist churches. I believe that is a matter of strategy and emphasis. I do not believe that all SBC churches might agree on the strategy. And that would include things such as which groups to meet with, what policy prescriptions to support, how to balance concerns about race with law enforcement concerns etc.”
“On issues like race, there is not really a substantive disagreement, but a question of tone and cobelligerance. Most in the SBC are very comfortable with our good brothers like Fred Luter and Dwight McKissic, but they are not comfortable with groups like Black Lives Matter. I believe the ERLC is more comfortable with affiliating with some groups than the SBC base.”
There has been no contact at all between Russell Moore and “Black Lives Matter.” But the association between the two is often mentioned to rile the SBC base against him without any supporting evidence.
Louis, the lawyer, is a friend of mine. He is not in favor of Dr. Russell Moore being fired, and my interactions with him have been mutually appreciative and respectful. I totally agree with Louis’ assessment of the roots and reasons of the Moore controversy. The only area where we differ is Louis’ concerns about Moore’s “tone” in addressing racial matters. Moore’s “tone” is a Kingdom “tone” seldom heard in SBC life on matters of race and justice. This newness of his “tone” in SBC life is what his critics are responding to. Moore speaks with a prophetic mantle that is more common to African American Baptist church tradition than historic Southern Baptist tradition. Many of us find his “tone” refreshing and biblical. It’s the same Kingdom “tone” that Southern Baptists sound on abortion and homosexuality; but for some reason, Southern Baptists are uncomfortable with this same tone being sounded on race and justice.
The Southern Baptist Convention Executive Committee is largely White, Republican and Trump-supporting. According to Louis, the attorney—immigration, tone and emphasis on race relations and positions taken on race and law enforcement are the root causes of the Moore controversy. On each of the positions, Moore tended to voice the pain, fears, hopes and dreams of the majority of the minorities in the SBC. Trying to find a SBC minority person, who would object to Moore’s published statements on the above three items, would be like attempting to find the proverbial needle in a haystack. Minorities in the SBC are ecstatic about Moore and his leadership.
What is it about the “tone” of Moore on race—as noted by Louis—that is problematic for White Southern Baptist Churches?
When Prestonwood questions Moore’s “beliefs and values” not reflecting the Southern Baptist Convention, just who are they referring to?
When David Hankins, Executive Director of the Louisiana Baptist Convention, said to the Wall Street Journal: “The question before Southern Baptists now is, ‘Does the ERLC share our convictions and thus deserve our financial support’?” Whose “convictions” are Mr. Hankins referring to? In both instances they are referring to the White Republican constituency of the SBC.
Russell Moore’s “tone” is offensive to the base constituency of the SBC, but his text is a breath of fresh air for those of us who have longed for the SBC to address matters of race and justice. He is anomaly in the SBC on race, and therefore he has to suffer for his “tone” while many of us celebrate his text.
One of the attractive features of the Southern Baptist Convention is its multi-ethnic inclusion and cooperation. However, most of the minorities in the Convention do not march in lock step with the Republican Party. The Executive Committee, by even launching this investigation, has moved dangerously close to consummating the obvious alliance between the Southern Baptist Convention and the Republican Party. If the alliance is consummated as a result of this unwarranted investigation, the message sent to all non-Republicans and to Black SBC churches is: “Pack your bags and leave.” This is the message that was recently spoken to me by Scott Young in a Facebook comment section of The Baptist Message, “SBC Executive Committee creates two panels to investigate SBC entities,” February 25, 2017, by Will Hall, Message Editor.
In response to my position that Black Churches may want to voice our displeasure of the investigation by reducing funds to the Cooperative Program; and Black Baptist Churches contemplating joining the SBC may want to await the outcome of the investigation before making a decision: “If that is truly your view, then pack your bags and leave the convention!” Scott Young was bold, unfiltered and brazen enough to say what I suspect the 80% Trump voters in the SBC want to say to Russell Moore and those of us who couldn’t get on the “Trump train” for ethical, convictional and racial reasons. Will the Executive Committee, based on their decision, in essence say to those not on the Trump train: “Pack your bags and leave”? It is profane to the Kingdom of God to intertwine ecclesiology and secular politics in a manner that is foundational to the concerns and complaints regarding Russell Moore.
All four issues Russell Moore is being investigated over have a race-based component: immigration, race relations, police brutality denouncement and his Trump critique. Moore has attempted to provide a Kingdom perspective to these issues. His critics are responding to the political and racial overtones of his message, while missing the Kingdom perspective.
President George W. Bush, whom I proudly voted for twice, because of his commitment to protect traditional marriage, stated concerning President Trump’s racial views:
“’I don’t like the racism and I don’t like the name-calling and I don’t like the people feeling alienated,’ Bush told People magazine in an interview…”
While not plainly labeled, President Trump is viewed as a racist by a Republican President. Yet, the Southern Baptist Convention is now investigating the Chief Ethics Officer for speaking a truth that a secular President can say, but not a Kingdom representative, assigned to ethics issues? Something is wrong with that picture.
Dr. Russell Moore is essentially under investigation by the Southern Baptist Convention for his accurate, biblical, prophetic and outspoken views regarding race in America. Prestonwood, Louisiana Baptists, Abilene Baptist in Augusta, GA, did not challenge or withhold funds or threaten to withhold funds when former ERLC President Richard Land made controversial racial remarks:
“In The Tennessean article, dated April 14, 2012, Travis Loller reports:
Land referred to racism as a “central myth” in response to charges of racism relative to the Trayvon Martin shooting. Land dug in his heels and publically claimed that he’d received overwhelming email support from the Southern Baptist Convention people and leaders in support of his views. Yet, no large SBC church pastor withheld funds or criticized Richard Land. Russell Moore has only spoken the truth about race and four race-based issues, and they now condemn him. This is painful to watch. Thank God that Richard Land—after many weeks of stalling—apologized. I believe he was sincere, and I accepted his apology. Russell Moore has apologized for crimes he did not commit. Yet, the Convention wants to proceed with an investigation? Is the SBC troubled by Russell Moore because he does not view racism as a “central myth” as his predecessor once claimed?
I’m grateful and proud to be a Southern Baptist. I also hold dual membership in the National Baptist Convention, USA, because it is important to me to be a part of a Convention where entity heads include people who resemble me. The National Baptist Convention, USA, membership, contrary to the SBC, primarily has members who support the Democratic Party. The two most celebrated National Baptist preachers in the past 40 years are the late Dr. J.H. Jackson and the late Dr. E.V. Hill. Both were proud Republicans, and both were accepted and beloved in the National Baptist Convention. Admittedly though, there were times when there was strong opposition expressed in the National Baptist Convention regarding their political affiliations. Neither was investigated or threatened to be booted from office because of their politics. Dr. J.H. Jackson publically endorsed Richard Nixon for POTUS during his annual address as President of the National Baptist Convention back in 1972. His endorsement was met with loud, boisterous, boos from the massive audience. Yet he served as President of the Convention for 29 years and was elected annually following his Nixon endorsement until 1982. Although not affecting Jackson in his capacity as leader, Dr. Hill’s political leanings possibly did. Dr. E.V. Hill served as Vice President for many years under Dr. Jackson; but when Dr. Hill ran for President of the Convention, he lost to lesser-known, Dr. William Shaw. Many would say Hill’s defeat was in part due to his Republican affiliation. The Southern Baptist Convention and the National Baptist Convention tend to blindly follow the Republican and Democratic Parties, respectively, regardless of the candidate. The Kingdom of God cannot be pleased with either Convention, relative to this partisan blind loyalty.
However, in SBC life, it is all but political suicide to admit that you vote Democratic. This becomes a huge problem for the SBC as it relates to minority outreach. I once read in a SBC blog comment stream that Fred Luter was the first SBC President that the Convention did not know how he voted for POTUS. Neither do I know; but what I do know is, if he voted Democrat and let it be known, the Southern Baptist Convention would have rejected him; and that would have been tragic, sinful and shameful.
Why is it that we know for sure that every previous President of the Southern Baptist Convention since the Reagan era voted for Republicans, but we don’t know how Dr. Fred Luter, the only Black President in SBC history voted? It’s because if Luter even hinted at supporting anyone other than the Republican Presidential Candidate, he likely would have been booed at the Southern Baptist Convention just as J.H. Jackson was booed at the National Baptist Convention. Our loyalty to the Kingdom must supersede our loyalty to political alignments and the breaking of fellowship if one gets out of line.
If Russell Moore is reprimanded or rejected, it would be difficult for me to be able to continue to say, I’m proud and grateful to be a Southern Baptist. I am not sure how a reprimand will affect many like-minded Black Baptists who are members of the SBC. For sure, it would be disheartening and disappointing. Therefore, this question must be raised: Should minority churches in SBC life financially increase or maintain their level of giving to a Convention that appears poised to respond punitively to an entity head, who would dare speak honestly and ethically—regarding a Republican Presidential candidate and race matters? Each minority SBC church will have to reach its own conclusion regarding this matter, pending the outcome of the investigation
Just as Dr. Martin Luther King was assassinated by his generation, yet celebrated by the next generation; just as C.H. Spurgeon was vilified by his generation for preaching against slavery in Alabama, but he was lionized for preaching against slavery “out of season” by subsequent generations; and just as Jesus came unto his own, and “his own received Him not”; Dr. Russell Moore has brought a prophetic word to “his own” and “his own” receives him not. I predict in the next generation, Dr. Russell Moore will be celebrated as the Southern Baptist who had the greatest impact on race relations in her history and policies and positions that are objectionable to some Southern Baptists today, will be representative of the vast majority of Southern Baptists of all races in the next generation. The late Dr. T.B. Matson, former Ethics Professor at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, may be the only other Southern Baptist that would belong in the same sentence as Russell Moore in Southern Baptist history with regard to impacting race relations systemically and globally; thus, improving the image of Southern Baptists regarding racial issues, which is important to our Great Commission objectives.
History will vindicate Russell Moore. Now we will wait and see if the Executive Committee will.
Dwight, thank you for this post and your perspective. This is something we need to hear and be aware of. I’ve seen this article garner a ton of attention on Facebook already – many from other black ministry leaders who question why Dwight remains affiliated with the SBC.
To my fellow white Southern Baptists, my plea is to listen. Don’t fire back comments and criticism. Listen well. This is a black SBC pastor letting us know his views and how he believes this situation is understood by many other minority SBs. Listen first and listen well.
Let me also discourage a tactic I anticipate seeing in the comment section. Dwight has covered a LOT of territory in this article. There are some who will disagree with different minor points that have very little bearing on the main point of his article: how minorities in the SBC view the pressure being brought on Russell Moore. Please don’t nitpick small details and take over the comment stream with minutiae. Let’s have a comment stream about the substance of what Dwight is saying here. Not I do/don’t like Dr. Moore. See every other comment stream over the past week for that discussion.
Brent,
I read Dwight’s post when I saw it on Facebook and had the same thought you did…we all need to read this thoughtfully trying to put ourselves in Dwight’s shoes. Over the past couple of years, my eyes have been opened to just how skewed my political thinking had been the the point of advocating a “to be a good Christian, Southern Baptist you better be a card-carrying Republican.” I now see that is the antithesis of Kingdom-minded thinking.
Dwight,
Thank you for posting your thoughts on this. I appreciate your candor and conviction. You are a great brother in Christ.
I couldn’t agree more, Scott. We can’t ignore Dwight’s challenge in this area if we want to become more racially and ethnically diverse as a denomination. The attitude that says, “We’re all for diversity! Now you guys come on over here and be like us” isn’t the kind that very many fellow believers are going to be interested in. If we say, “We long for diversity and make it a priority to listen and value your perspective” — well that’s more along the lines of what our attitude should be when we’re considering others as more important than ourselves.
Here’s the post on Facebook in case anyone wants to follow the comments section there. I mentioned it above and I found it fascinating last night to read the responses to Dwight’s post.
https://www.facebook.com/william.mckissic.1/posts/843653215772685
I agree with your assessment, Brent. My thoughts concerning our relationship with our non-Anglo brothers is that we take a posture of listening and learning as we seek to build unity. As we discuss the various implications of what is happening with the Convention and the ERLC, we dare not ignore the impact any decision we make might have on the unity with our brothers of color.
I think your guidelines for listening and discussion are helpful and needed and I hope that commenters will follow them.
Why do you feel only whites should listen and learn? Should that not apply to blacks, Hispanics and every other minority group also? Here lies the issues, we are dividing Christians into groups and thinking that all opinions are valid. Just because the so called black churches have one point of view concerning Trump or any matter, at the end of it all the truth should prevail. If they are wrong we must say they are wrong. We can’t think like the world because we are not of the world. At the end truth should prevail regardless of who said it. And just because someone is a black christian in a prominently black church does not mean he thinks the rest of his congregation and the same goes for all other skin colors.
Last I checked my Bible, the command to “Be slow to speak and quick to listen” applies to people of every race, not just white people.
I agree, Brent, that we need to listen and avoid nitpicking if we desire unity. This is what we heard during the Zimmerman trial, in the immediate aftermath of Ferguson, and so on.
It’s convenient to suggest that those who have questions at the detail level believe that “to be a good Christian, Southern Baptist you better be a card-carrying Republican”. Maybe this is true for some. But this type of engagement has less to do with fostering dialogue and more to do with pressuring opponents (and perceived opponents) into silent submission.
You know your Baptist history. This has never worked out well as a strategy for us.
Well said!
Wonderfully put!
Pastor Dwight McKissic, I agree wholeheartedly with your thorough assessment and conclusions. I am a white pastor who was relieved to hear Dr. Moore speak out and challenge the unholy alliance the SBC has often had with the Republican party. Such an alliance has hurt our credibility and diverted our focus and commitment to the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus. If this “investigation” concludes without an affirmation of Dr. Moore, there will be a brutally chilling affect throughout SBC churches – black and white. I am standing with you!
Thanks for challenging us to think about this from a different perspective, Dwight. It’s important for us to consider how decisions affect all Southern Baptists.
I would say, however, that I don’t perceive the EC to be “investigating” the ERLC. Looking at what is happening with churches escrowing CP funds isn’t necessarily a bad thing. We’ll have to see what happens.
Adam, I think Dwight is challenging those who understand the ECs actions as a neutral fact-finding mission. It may end up being that in the end. I hope you’re right. Dwight is willing to wait and see, but he’s saying it doesn’t have that appearance from his perspective. The bad thing is we probably won’t know until the work is done and whatever report is presented. It may be even handed and peace making like I hope it will be – or it could be a thinly-veiled attempt at putting more pressure on Russell Moore, which is what Dwight and I fear.
Dwight and Brent,
I agree with your, I think healthy, skeptical concern relating to the “study groups”.
However, for consistency – I am not sure that this result of this article is substantively different in tactic than is the actions of Prestonwood.
The “black church” announcing they’re going to leave the SBC or withhold CP and encourage other “black churches” to not affiliate in defense of Moore – is the same tactic many of us are not happy about with regard to Prestonwood.
Also again, I continue to reject the notion that there’s any such thing as “the black church” or “the white church” or the “Hispanic church” or the Whatever…there’s just the church who are in Christ. Col. 3:10,11.
Tarheel, I agree theologically that there is no white/black/other kind of church. However, theological ideals are not always expressed fully in reality. The truth is that we do have black churches (churches who are predominantly black) and white churches, Korean churches, Chinese churches, Multicultural churches, Ethiopian churches, etc… I think many would agree what we currently see isn’t the ideal, but how to solve that isn’t easy and certainly nothing a blog comment section is equipped to host a healthy discussion on either. The black church does exist and is a cultural anchor in the black community. It’s not really helpful to try and ignore that reality, however well-intentioned.
Brent,
I understand your point. I just think it’s pretty unhealthy to continue to prop up and propagate a “reality” that is so anti gospel.
I agree a comment stream is not equipped to handle it (some will soon likely accuse my thoughts of somehow being racist or what have ya) but I’m not sure how wise it is to ignore the theological truth in order to “deal in reality”.
Shouldn’t we be counter cultural more than cultural reality?
I agree with the article and comments that we gotta become less reflexively Republican.
By we I mean the SBC.
As we see from the Facebook comment stream that Brent linked to… There are some people who are reflexively Democrats.
They need to stop that, too.
Tarheel has good points here.
There are faithful SBC members who are staunch in their support for each of the political parties…and all would do well to not be so tied to those over the kingdom.
Oh how I wish that Dr. Graham and Dr. Moore would have gotten together with our SBC Pres. or past Pres. for some brother to brother conversations instead of doing this in via the media.
JP, what makes you sure those private meetings haven’t taken place already? Maybe people have already been working to smooth things over and those attempts have failed. I expect a lot of people are making efforts behind the scenes, we can pray that those would be successful.
Dwight,
Important and wise words. My only addition to these will be that young SBCers will join their minority brothers and sisters in asking many, maybe all, of these questions for many of the same reasons. A move against Dr. Moore will result in the SBC becoming whiter and grayer.
Not good for a denomination in an increasingly diverse and youth focused culture.
May yours words be heard my brother.
Tar Heel,
Grateful we both share respect & appreciation for Russell Moore and his leadership at the ERLC.
My article does not “announce” any Black Churches planning on leaving the SBC because of me mistreatment of Russell Moore. It does mention a response(and correct one, in my opinion) to a reprimand or rejection of RM should cause each church to examine carefully the reasons why. And if it’s determined that RM was reprimanded or rejected(in part, or in whole)because of his views on Trump….then & only then those churches have to understand that the SBC just decided to be the Trump Baptist Convention, & this need to evaluate the relationship in light of that fact. It could mean to decide to remain as is; remain but reduce giving to express displeasure with the decision and because u would be funding a CP that’s sided with a racist, and have simultaneously scoffed at their view of Trump, that’s similar to RM; or an option would be to leave the convention due to incompatibility; and in the case of churches considering joining…the EC RM info is important to know, in terms of helping to determine whether or not u want to join the SBC. Some Black Churches(very, very few) are Trump leaning & Rebublucan loving. Obviously, the SBC would be a great place for them. And their pastor would be a potential entity head candidate. But, most are not. Therefore, don’t u think it’s important for them to understand the ramifications of the outcome of the investigation? Finally, I sort of agree. My approach to the article is similar to Prestonwood’s approach. But again, I do believe if RM is reprimanded or fired, a certain number of churches would react to his firing with a new & official understanding of the Unholy alliance between the SBC & the Republican Party. That’s bound to cause reaction. Time will tell what the reaction will be, and the EC needed to be aware of the possible unintended consequences of their decision.
Are churches lock step with democrats to be termed “holy alliance”. I don’t see it. Abortion stance is one reason.
Brother Dwight do you predict a negative response from Black churches if the EC reprimands RM for how he frequently addresses those he perceives to not be aligned with his politics?
Second question, I’m assuming you’ve read his various public statements over the years where he makes some pretty powerful assertions about conservative evangelical pastors and laity. In your view, do any of them rise to a level requiring a reprimand?
I love ya, Dwight.
We’ve had our share of disagreements – most often as to process rather than principle – nevertheless, I consider you a friend and and a brother and would hate to see you leave the SBC or reduce your funding over these issues.
I hear ya and I understand where you’re coming from.
The unholy alliance between the SBC and the Republican Party is certainly troublesome as is any Christian’s reflexive and Holy Alliances with the Democrat party.
One reason I have come to support Russell Moore despite various disagreements that I have with him – is that he had the courage to break that mold and speak – dare I say it – “truth to power”.” One reason I have come to support Russell Moore despite various disagreements that I have with him – is that he had the courage to break that mold and speak – dare I say it – “truth to power”.
How we (corporately) react will be revealing to say the least.
*UNholy alliances with the democrat party.
I definitely agree that the age where conservative evangelicals (particularly Southern Baptists) walk lockstep with the Republican Party is at or near an end. Younger conservatives have seen that government grows under governments dominated by an R and a D and they are increasing finding the logic in a Libertarian viewpoint.
But while the GOP is losing its hold on white Baptists, can the same be said regarding the DNC and black Baptists? I sincerely hope so because if not, it becomes tough to not see this discussion as a partisan one with a thin veneer of theological / denominational shine.
Dwight, YOur post confirms the fact that the ERLC has an impossible task. It is impossible to represent the views of an increasingly diverse group of churches that is the SBC. Most are missions focused. Sadly fewer are really into local evangelism. Some are more reformed and some lean the other way. Some are very concerned about Social Gospel issues. Some are very passionate about ending abortion. But none of us can be passionate about everything…
As far as the Trump thing. I really do not believe the vast majority of Southern Baptists who VOTED for Trump would disagree with the concerns Moore raised about Trump’s character. Most of us would have preferred another candidate. So they did not appreciate being characterized by Moore as knuckle dragging backwoods buffoons. I know some supported Trump from the beginning. But not many. And everyone who voted for Trump was disgusted by the fact that Moore never called out Hillary’s moral bankruptcy on issue after issue.
Moore has not approached his position in the same even handed way Richard Land did. And I believe Moore to be a person of high Christian integrity. But he has chosen to be too political. This has been and continues to be his problem. The ERLC is to be moral issue oriented with a charge to HELP CHURCHES understand these issues and educate/motivate SBC congregations to live as light. Calling out Donald Trump does not accomplish its primary purpose. The ERLC needs to go. It is a distraction in our pursuit of the Great Commission.
“As far as the Trump thing. I really do not believe the vast majority of Southern Baptists who VOTED for Trump would disagree with the concerns Moore raised about Trump’s character. Most of us would have preferred another candidate. So they did not appreciate being characterized by Moore as knuckle dragging backwoods buffoons. I know some supported Trump from the beginning. But not many.”
I think you have misinterpreted Moore’s statements about support for Trump. This is not too surprising because Moore very often was not as clear as he should have been about who his criticisms were and were not directed at, but he did make those distinctions both before and after the election.
“I understand the sort of Evangelical or Catholic who, looking at these choices, believes that he or she must choose the lesser of two evils, acknowledging the moral catastrophe at play with both of the two major candidates, and who hopes and prays for the best with a less than ideal president.
…
“I understand why some, including some devout religious conservatives, argue that they recognize the moral and temperamental unfitness of a man such as Trump for the nation’s highest office, but feel they must cast their ballots for him in an effort to forestall the very real perils of a Supreme Court increasingly hostile to the most basic of religious freedoms and constitutional restraints. While I disagree with my religious conservative friends who think this way, that is a respectable and defensible view. They are not provoking the crisis we face today.” – Russell Moore, 10/24/2016
“But there were also pastors and friends who told me when they read my comments they thought I was criticizing anyone who voted for Donald Trump. I told them then, and I would tell anyone now: if that’s what you heard me say, that was not at all my intention, and I apologize. There’s a massive difference between someone who enthusiastically excused immorality and someone who felt conflicted, weighed the options based on biblical convictions, and voted their conscience.” Russell Moore, 12/19/2016
Moore did focus much more on the issues with Trump than those with Clinton. He did bring up Hillary’s moral bankruptcy, but not with the same frequency or with the same detail he devoted to Trump. I do think he should have gone into more detail about the problems with supporting Clinton, but I agree with which candidate he put his focus on.
Excellent post by Allen Calkins. Thank you, brother. Moore’s denigrating characterizations of Trump voters were not difficult to understand.
Brad,
So is that’s what this is all about?; Moore “denigrating” Trump voters? If so, he’s apologized for that. Can’t we accept his apology & move on?
Brad,
Would you give an example of Moore’s “denigrating characterizations, please?
Jonathan,
One would have to ask, where were the reprimands to the ERLC President & many other SBC officers when they were criticizing Bill Clinton, & implying that Democrats are not less than Christian, or were/are in bed with
an evil party? Nada. Zero.
It was viewed as ethically addressing political matters. RM should be able to address these issue, as his predecessor did, & other SBC officials without being reprimanded.
I don’t know how Black churches will respond to a reprimand of RM. I only know that I’ve been contacted by several since my post, and they are already contemplating the decision in the event he’s reprimanded.
Dwight is spot on here. Part of the reason those of us in the New Orleans Baptist Association leadership drafted and signed a letter in support of Moore is due to his vigorous defense of issues that directly relate to our heavily ethnically diverse association. My prayer is that we’d be less known as “Ministers on the Right” and more known as ” Ministers of Reconciliation.”
Russell Moore is a man whose courage and wisdom shine out in this dark world.
” Whose “convictions” are Mr. Hankins referring to? In both instances they are referring to the White Republican constituency of the SBC.”
Exactly.
Practically every day, the new president bears out Russell Moore’s concerns. But I fear right wing politics and money will win the day.
And if they do win, what will the SBC lose? :/
Bill Mac,
you said:
“Practically every day, the new president bears out Russell Moore’s concerns. ”
Such as a quality Supreme Court nominee? The other party insisted they would nominate a Justice nominee who would support abortion and transgender and LGBT agenda. You prefer what the other candidate would have done?
Rescinding the transgender facilities position forced upon people by Obama and totally supported by the other candidate? Please read the lawsuit filed by the parent of teen aged girls in Chicago to see the real impact of the democratic backed ungodly policy. It would be your desire that the transgender agenda was still being forced upon communities?
Has committed to the repeal of the Johnson Amendment. Of course Mr. Moore has remained silent on that issue. Legislation has already been introduced in both House and Senate. You do not want a return to the norm from Colonial period until 1954?
These type issues are not just political, they are Biblical also. Seems like support for Mr. Moore is revolving more and more around name calling and less and less about any Biblical justification. Surely even a partisan democrat could have kind words for the above actions.
Moore and the ERLC came out with positive affirming statements in regard to both the Supreme Court Nominee and the transgender bathrooms issue.
Personally, I hope he opposes the repeal of the Johnson amendment.
Repealing the Johnson amendment is not a good thing.
I know there are a lot of things to discuss surrounding the issue with Moore, the ERLC and the CP. We have had a lot of discussion so far and, though I am a strong Moore supporter, I am sympathetic to some of the concerns that have been brought up by others who do not agree with me.
Who we haven’t heard from are our non-Anglo brothers. Regardless if we ultimately agree with opinions of Dwight and others, those opinions must be considered and the implications of our decisions need to include the impact any decision will make on race relations and unity across racial/ethnic lines with our brothers in the SBC.
Thank you, Dwight, for sharing your perspective. I hope that whatever side of the debate we’ve been on so far that we will listen and prayerfully consider these concerns.
^^ These are great thoughts from Todd, I hope everyone stops to read.
#RussellMoore How did the chaos of Caesar get so entangled with the cause of Christ? Screwtape has found an Achilles heel. “Go ye … and make disciples …” has morphed into “Stay hither and bicker.” Focus on the Cross. All is not lost.
I am a supporter of Dr. Moore, but I think the biggest issue is not his opposition to the President, but his support of the New Jersey mosque and a perceived condescension toward those who do not agree with him.
It wasn’t a “support of the New Jersey mosque,” but opposition to legal discrimination based on the fact that they were a Muslim place of worship. Now how hypocritical would it have been not to stand for the mosque having the right to build, but turn around and stand for some Baptist Church being denied in some property issue? What he did was intellectually consistent and loving.
I cannot tell you how much I value Pastor McKissic’s friendship. It’s articles like this that stretch us and help us see through the eyes of another person. Thank you, brother.
The relationship between the ERLC ruckus and black SBC churches is one that I was not aware of. I believe a satisfactory compromise to solve this problem is to eliminate the ERLC entirely. That agency is radioactive and too hot to handle.
The crux of the problem is that around 80% of the SBC “guys in the pew” likely voted for Trump. Most stipulate that Trump is out of sync with Christian values. But people voted for him out of desperation because he gave hope to people who had been marginalized — and ignored — by all branches and levels of government.
Wouldn’t one way forward be to eliminate the ERLC?
Then Dr. Moore could state his case in an environment where he could be a moral beacon without speaking ex-cathedra for the whole SBC. Dr. Moore could go back to Southern Seminary. He could teach a few DMin seminars such as “Christianity in the Public Square” or he could host debates regarding various issues that relate to the intersection of Christianity and Government. Dr.Moore could moderate a debates on various public square topics — such as whether the SBC should or should not filing amicus briefs on certain court cases.
Remember Dr. Moore apologized for his remarks. Most people accepted his apology.
The way forward is to focus on the root cause of the problem: morally bankrupt candidates and people in the pews who voted for them anyway. I admit that I’m part of the problem. I actually voted for either Clinton or Trump. At the same time I am member of an evangelical church. As a matter of fact, it is an SBC church. Don’t blame Dr. Moore for this problem.
It seems to be that everyone around here is conflating Dr. Moore with the ERLC. I think recognizing that each of these is separate helps to turn down the heat.
Whatever happens, a lot of people are going to have to be willing to compromise. Otherwise this could be the beginning of the end of the SBC. It is impossible to run a convention when people are so divided.
The fight that led to the conservative resurgence was a hill to die on. This isn’t.
Roger OKC
I appreciate your comments. But I don’t know if it’s easy to say, “The crux of the problem is that around 80% of the SBC “guys in the pew” likely voted for Trump.” It just isn’t my experience. Most people I know voted third part or did not vote at all. But I do think you make valid points.
Nearly every Christian I know (90% +) who chose to vote voted for Trump.
We must run in different circles. Nearly every Christian I know did not vote for Trump. And I’m in the heart of the Bible Belt.
It’s also important to remember that so many who did vote for Trump were not Trump supporters, but rather anti-Hillary. Feeling it was a binary choice they pulled the lever for Trump. Those that I know that are Trump supporters were so on certain watershed issues that were very important to them.
But the big takeaway here is that this might very well reflect the views of minority SBCers and they should be taken seriously. The views of our brothers are important because they are our brothers.
This lets us know that our circles are diverse and we should probably stop speaking so dogmatically about issues that vary based on social settings. Ideals and ideologies are shaped by environment and the diversity in America says we should all be doing more listening than talking, but this is required even more from a majority group that is raised in a culture that affirms the majority ideals.
“If Moore is marginalized or fired, 80-90 percent of Southern Baptist Black Churches who share Moore’s views on President Trump, would also simultaneously feel as if their political convictions regarding the current President of the United States would also be officially reprimanded, rejected and rebuked by the Southern Baptist Convention.”
I don’t know that this would be the outcome but Dwight is certainly more in touch with those churches than I. There is a vast divide between White and Black SBC churches on politics.
“The Executive Committee, by even launching this investigation, has moved dangerously close to consummating the obvious alliance between the Southern Baptist Convention and the Republican Party. ”
I think Dwight is misreading the Executive Committee’s action on this but if I were the EC chair or on either of the two committees I’d certainly want to know the perception about the creation of the two study groups. While some think the anti-Moore, anti-ERLC, anti-Calvinist train has left the station, I rather think the essentially powerless Executive Committee will work to lower the rhetoric and repair damage without encouraging precipitate action.
William, I hope you’re right on your assessment of the EC actions. More than that, thank you for setting an example in how to listen and consider a different perspective.
I think you are right, William. The EC is not stupid. They know that for every anti-Moore Southern Baptist there is a pro-Moore Southern Baptist. The EC needs a peaceful resolution to this that is acceptable to all reasonable SBs.
I was partially asleep when I wrote my last comment. I didn’t take up the issue of a political party litmus tests in the SBC. I agree It is a sad state of affairs if there is a de-facto prerequisite to leadership in the SBC — namely you have to be a card-carrying Republican.
I remember as a kid back in 1960 I came out and supported JFK for president. The local SBC church I was attending at the time went non-linear when I wore my JFK button. They told me I was way off because I was supporting a guy that would be a puppet of the pope. I didn’t think Nixon was the right guy. Well, we all remember what happened to Nixon.
I agree with Dr. McKissic: Political party litmus tests for SBC leadership positions don’t hold water. They are disconnected from Christianity.
For the record, I don’t believe Dr. Moore should be fired either. He just needs to move to a job where people argue stuff on its merits rather than going ballistic.
Good grief! Of course many in the SBC liked JFK! Many SBCers also supported Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, especially Carter. But the Dems have gone so immoral/unbiblical and so aggressively opposed to everything the Bible stands for that it is hard FOR ME to understand how thoughtful Christians can vote Dem.
I have told my cong for several years to not vote for any candidate at any level of government that is pro abortion or supportive of the gay agenda. After I say that I let them know I fully understand that statement puts one political party in a much better position than the other. But the fact that is true IS NOT MY FAULT. I would love for at least some Dems to return to a Pro-life position and support traditional morals instead of legislating immorality.
That is part of what I was trying to say in one of my comments. Thank you.
Allen,
“I have told my cong for several years to not vote for any candidate at any level of government that is pro abortion or supportive of the gay agenda.”
Yet Trump is pro gay agenda. (See his emphasis and personal invites to the GOP convention)
Just sayin’.
Allan: You have got to be kidding with your comment. And Donald Trump hasn’t been immoral? Just the fact that he’s on wife # 3 makes your comment unbelievable! And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
Thank you for a great perspective. I pray many people will read and think seriously about this. For too many years the SBC has been a politicial arm of the Republican Party with no room for any dissent from the party line. Any other opinions are quickly railed against. It’s a version of political correctness that has nothing to do with the gospel. May God have mercy on us.
From a lay member. Dr. Moore is too concerned with his personal agenda to be the head of the ERLC. This is NOT a racial issue and opposition to Dr. Moore predated his criticism of Trump supporters. The ERLC is not worth the dissension. Dr. Moore is certainly not worth the dissension.
Mike Crane, you are absolutely right. As a lay person I became aware of Dr. Moore by his secular press coverage. I think he went way over the top expressing his viewpoint using his SBC position. This is gone way beyond R. Moore, his actions and results show the ERLC is just not needed. I did not even know it existed and would say the same if I were aware of Land’s foray into political issues. The SBC leadership is too top heavy and is diverting money and energy from the focus of missions. The more I find out about CP the more I thing is not needed, another layer to siphon off money intended for missions. If Moore stays and the ERLC remains on its present course there will be a split when the majority of SBC members know what is going on. Transparency and accountability is needed in the SBC. The average SBC member has no idea of Dr. Moore or the ERLC. The ERLC exist for Dr. Moore and others to draw a salary of ? no one knows, which is part of the problem. If there was no ERLC this whole blog and many others would not have happened.
When I started following the articles and writings of Dr. Moore I was surprised that the mainstream liberal media that used him as their go to guy for political/social issues never mentioned his views on patriarchy. I am sure they were aware of his firm belief in patriarchy as it appears to me it was a big agenda of his public persona prior to ERLC, then it became muted to a large degree. Again I am way past Moore as it is clear he got the SBC into an internal needless perhaps harmful debate for no valid SBC reason. Now that I am following the ball I believe the ERLC was and is not needed, I am wondering if the CP program is as effective as I thought at one time. This blog and the others highlight how the ERLC is more a divider not a constructive force to advance the SBC main focus missions.
Isn’t what Dwight is saying about Blacks and the Cooperative Program, about the same as Jack Graham and Prestonwood. Why is one right and the other wrong?
How many White entity heads are in the National Baptist Convention? How many non-Black presidents have they had?
Are some guilty of making too many issues Black vs. White?
Are some guilty of driving wedges between Black and Whites?
Are some too sensitive about race?
Can Blacks be as guilty of racism as Whites?
Shouldn’t both sides be heard?
About 20% of SBC churches are predominately non-White. Maybe not perfect, but a pretty good record.
David R. Brumbelow
David B.,
How many White Baptist Churches belong to the NBC, for their pastor to qualify as an entity head? None to my knowledge. Therefore, your point is a non-point ’bout, how many White entity heads are there in the NBC.
Admittedly it’s hard to have white pastors involved in NBC leadership if none are involved in the convention. Dwight brings up a good point (understatement!).
Thankfully the SBC does have a fair amount of minority participation in membership, has seen some progress on committees and boards, I think good progress in who’s on the platform at the convention & Pastors’ Conference (particularly this year!) though not much yet at the entity head level. My plea on that front would be to note there’s a very small number of slots and they don’t come available terribly often. But you’re right we do need to demonstrate at some point (sooner rather than later) that the highest levels of leadership are available to everyone. At the same time, I’m not hoping for any entity head position to come available in the near future. 😉
I don’t think it’s a non-point. That is EXACTLY the point he was trying to make that the NBC is a predominantly black denomination. What is the NBC doing to work on race relations? Is it wrong that their churches don’t have many non-black congregants? Is anyone starting a race reconciliation committee to reach out to whites? This whole idea about focusing on race is actually causing a great deal of trouble within the body of Christ, not because the church shouldn’t be composed of all nations, but that we think there is something wrong with one group of people being drawn to cooperate with another group of people who reflect their values. The black community has some different focuses and values than the white community. There is nothing inherently wrong with that so long as the main points are the main points, life including the life of the unborn. Supporting democrats, in my opinion, generally flies in the face of supporting life, especially of the defenseless. The Democratic party is a party of death, period. They are mostly a party of ungodly family unions and gender distortion. In the same sense, the white church may just be joinging together in fellowship because of geography, style of worship, etc. It most likely has nothing to do with being anti-black. I don’t know anyone in my church who dislikes anyone because of their skin color. In fact, I attended a church in Houston that was predominantly white, but had a black pastor and was a member of the SBC. The idea that whites cannot understand black because we don’t share their political affiliation is ludicrous. Perhaps, the focus should not be on party, but the scriptures. I think we can all agree on that, but how that looks is going to be different. Many disagree with Dr. Moore on how he uses his position. They disagree with the ERLC being necessary. They believe that his view on attending a homosexual wedding reception is against scripture. His tone was not Christ-like on some very public issues. Others have been unChristlike too. This should not be.
homeschool: When have Whites ever been through what the black community has been through? To ask that when it is whites that have the “power” is I want to use the word racist, but that may be too strong a word. Yet I know of no other word to use.
David B,
The difference in outcomes is the difference between Graham & I are saying. If the SBC yields to Graham, the Republican Party is the winner. Not criticizing a Republican presidential candidate would be codified in SBC’s list of unwritten rules, that after 34 yrs of belonging, I still don’t know of all the unwritten rules. If RM is not reprimanded or rejected the Kingdom wins. And it would be established that there are no partisan political litmus tests, to determine SBC orthodoxy or qualifications to be an entity head. Therein lies the difference.
McKissic, Moore and Matson are SBC giants speaking truth to the masses of Anglo fewer non Anglos in the kingdom body politic. My prayer is that those who have ears to hear will humble themselves and pray for justice and mercy in our denomination. Let the political minorities speak and participate or we will lose prophetic voices and risk rebuilding our forefathers’ idols in our high agencies of cooperation. Shalom
Dwight,
Thank you for revealing your perspective.
I would have otherwise not imagined the impact this issue [these issues?] would have had on my brothers and sisters whom you represent by your words and advocacy.
I could not vote for Trump [nor Hillary for that matter].
I don’t like some of what Dr. Moore and the ERLC has done [amicus brief for Mosque], but I understand that he was acting in accordance with SBC policy and sentiment towards what they call religious freedom or freedom to worship.
Therefore I have no problem with Dr. Moore continuing on in his role.
Having said that, seeing how, to be blunt, I don’t always think like an African American, I also do not think that those who are after Dr. Moore considered the impact they would have on community and churches such as and similar to yours. I am not ‘sticking up’ for their actions since I disagree with them [those that want to oust Dr. Moore] but MANY [please NOTE: not all] of those who are against Moore think that they represent a majority of Southern Baptists.
And that many of these many have wanted to oust Moore BEFORE he did anything they now complain about. Because he is a Calvinist.
So thank you again for informing us of how many feel and how this issue affects them and their thinking. I don’t want to be part of a SBC that is an arm of the Republican Party. I don’t want to be a part of a SBC which seeks by its actions to marginalize people groups. And i don’t want to be a part of a SBC that puts church politics over Gospel witness. So I join with you and others praying the the SBC does not become those things or loses those evil traits if it has acquired them.
I want to compliment Dwight also on his explanation of his reaction to the escrowing of funds by Jack Graham and others because of Russell Moore’s position on Donald Trump.
Russell Moore’s willingness to speak out on issues has been a breath of fresh air after years of Richard Land’s leadership of the ERLC where it was little more than a subset of the Republican party and the CNP. Land placed politics above theology and above historic Baptist principles.
I have wondered why Jack Graham objected to Moore’s criticism of those supporting Trump but to my knowledge has no criticism of his fellow Trump advisor Robert Jeffress saying on national television that any conservative Christian who doesn’t vote for Trump is a hypocrite and a coward.
I knew T.B. Matson. He was a giant among Southern Baptist when it came to race relations back in the 50s and 60s when it was not popular and was attacked ruthlessly by leaders of our convention. He is rarely mentioned today even though some of those who attacked him are revered.
Dwight, you are wrong on two matters. Get your facts straight.
1. “the highest ranking Black person working on staff at the seven-story Southern Baptist Convention Executive Building in Nashville, TN, was the head custodian.”
No. She was and still is only “custodial assistant.”
http://www.sbcec.org/roster/BusinessFinance.asp. This was the denomination I had to represent in a major multiethnic city for many years.
2. “If the alliance is consummated as a result of this unwarranted investigation, the message sent to all non-Republicans and to Black SBC churches is: “Pack your bags and leave.””
I’m surprised that you left out the Latinos, Asians and other ethnic churches.
Jay,
1. I asked who was the highest ranking Black on staff in the EC building when Morris Chapman was President of the EC, and I was told the “head custodian.” Now I believe I was given an “alternative fact.” My assumption I was told “head custodian” in order to make it sound good, or as if that would be enough for me to say, good job.
2. I stand to be corrected again. The majority of Asians, Hispanics, and other ethnic churches were not Trump voters either. Therefore, the message also applies to them: “Pack Your Bags & Leave,”
Thanks for the corrections.
Actually, y’all are both wrong – i’ll grant you that the executive committee is not laden with African-Americans… But you’re both wrong about the highest ranking African-American at the executive committee:
http://www.sbcec.org/roster/ConventionAdvancement.asp
Tarheel,
Ethnic inclusion at our national and state entities have been moving painfully slow. During those years when the only Af-Am staff at the SBC EC was that one Af-AM “custodial assistant,” I actually did meet black leaders like Ken W. and the only EC board member (1 out of 50) and expressed my concern for years about the lack of ethnic diversity at our national and state entities. Since then, changes at our national and state offices have been tokenism by and large.
See, for example, EC board (http://mobaptist.org/executive-office/executive-board/), Indiana (https://www.scbi.org/scbi/staff-directory), Kentucky (http://www.kybaptist.org/our-staff,1037),
Illinois (http://www.ibsa.org/business, http://www.ibsa.org/crt, http://www.ibsa.org/churchplanting), Ohio (http://www.scbo.org/our-team) to show only a few. Many others list only names or black/white pics (!) (EC for example).
Donald, do you really think the majority of Trump supporters in the SBC were just anti Hillary? Trump support was real and still is with the majority of SBC lay members. Not that it matters in this discussion but why is does this even come up? Trump would not have carried the South without SBC members , he would have beat any Democrat candidate.
Tar Heel,
Read carefully. Jay is something the person I referred to while Morris Chapman was EC President was not the “head custodian,” as I’d been told, but rather a “custodial assistant.” Jay nor I are arguing that the current highest ranking African American is a custodian. Hope this clarified the matter for u.
DONALD, Thank you! That is the first affirmation I have read that would say the opinion of other SBCers, even if they are small in number, matters! Nobody deserves to be marginalized. The main reason Prestonwood chose to escrow their PC $$ was to get SOMEBODY in the SBC to at least LISTEN. …Everyone deserves to be heard.
Even those “disrespectful” T-shirt clad seminarians?
I’m genuinely curious how my believers overlook a major plank of the Democratic platform (abortion) to vote for Democrats? To me this is a matter of teaching and instruction where pastors need to be bold and courageous to challenge their people in this area of their thinking. In our church, some of the strongest pro-life advocates are African Americans who have (in their own words) “come off the Democrat plantation” to see that it was completely inconsistent to be a Christian and support political candidates who have no problem murdering babies. This isn’t something where we can just all “get along to go along.”
In this I’m not saying the Republican party is always the answer. There are other options and there are independents. But, blindly vote for a person who’s party literally booed the inclusion of God during their convention and have zero problem sucking babies out of a mother’s womb? And, to make it even worse, they do it most in black communities!
This is a serious spiritual blindness.
The same way Christians overlook the anti-poverty stances taken by the Republican Party. One doesn’t value life in the womb. One doesn’t value life outside of it.
No party has a corner on biblical morality no matter what we are told.
Abs, First, the R platform is not anti poverty (assuming you mean anti helping the poor) Or at least no one yet has proved that.
Two, even is it is proved to be anti poverty, an act of abortion snuffs out a baby life. A platform position or positions, if they are anti-poverty ( and I assume you mean by anti-poverty that Rs don’t care to do anything about poverty) may impact quality of life, but the poor person is still breathing.
That you would even try to equate baby killing and poverty is really shameful.
To be fair – both parties seek to deal with poverty – neither party as an official part of its platform celebrates poverty – or ignores poverty – they just both have different approaches to dealing with poverty.
There are pros and cons to both approaches and different people would lean toward different approach is based on their ideological and philosophical leanings… But to suggest that the Republican Party somehow endorses poverty or ignores the problem of poverty is ludicrous.
Les,
We have done this before. I’m not ashamed. I’m pro-life womb to tomb. It matters not just that babies are born, but that they have a shot at a decent life. You can’t have that without a social services safety net- which is exactly where the Republicans always seek to make their spending cuts.
Does it not matter to you what happens to the child AFTER they are born. That they have a chance to keep breathing because they have food and shelter and a chance to better themselves?
Of course it does! Because you are a Christian man who loves people and Jesus. That’s my point. Abortion is an atrocity. It’s a shame that it is part of the Democractic platform. Balancing the budget on the backs of the poor is also an atrocity. It’s a shame it’s a part of regular Republican practice.
Neither party is pristine in regards to being pro life.
Yes abs we’ve don’t this before. And of course I’m pro life womb to tomb as well. Your earlier statement essentially equating poverty with baby killing was and still is ludicrous. Baby killing is worse. They are not equal. Even if, and there is not proof, that Rs take anti-poverty (assuming you mean they take stances that seek to make poverty worse) stances, that is not as bad as Ds taking pro baby slaughter stances. Death and hunger are both wrong. I’ve seen both in my ministry in Haiti. Death is worse. Period.
So being pro-life “Womb to Tomb” means that I must support a Leftist/Socialist version of a welfare state? That’s what Christians like yourself insinuate with this type of rhetoric.
Dan, are you and your church SBC?
http://www.sbc.net/churchsearch/results.asp?query=Westland%2C+MI
Dan,
An article that I will asked my assistant to link to later, documents the racism with the Republican Party, that’s a much deeper & stronger strand of racism than that which runs through the Democratic Party. Sessions & Bannon’s racial histories are atrocious. Sessions has endorsed profit driven prisons, which should be illegal. A White judge has been sentenced to jail himself for sentencing Blacks to a prison that he’d invested in. He’d make profits off of every sentencing. Sessions changed the policy & will no longer investigate police brutality cases, or oversee the follow up oversight plans in places like Ferguson & Baltimore, where police abuse has been well documented. Choosing to vote for racism or, to vote against abortion for a party that has done nothing to change the abortion or gay marriage trajectory in 40 yrs-is a no brainer. It’s not as simple as u make it. Democrats are better at social justice, helping the poor, investigating police brutality complaints , affirmative action, & funding public education. Those are all pro-life matters as well. The obsession & fixation with abortion is what resulted in the election of racist Donald Trump. SBC have to live with their conscience having voted for a racist and an AG office that will not investigate & oversee cases of police abuse. Yes, Democrats voted for a candidate that supports abortion, but for the evangelical Blacks who voted Democrat, they were voting for the party that bests protects the quality of life for living Blacks. There is evil on both sides of the political spectrum. Blacks simply choose the side that been less tainted with racism, since the days of Barry Goldwater & the Kennedy brothers having sprang Dr. M. L, King, Jr from jail, who was also a victim of police abuse. Hope this helps u understand.
Dan,
Please google:
“Researchers have found strong evidence that racism helps GOP win”
Article found in Washington Post.
Blacks intuitively detect racism, particularly systemic racism. Again, it runs in both parties, but the strain that runs in the RP is deep & strong, more so that the one that runs in the GP. That explains why Blacks as a whole don’t vote Republican. Trump’s cabinet has only one Black over HUD, Ben Carson. It’s been probably since the late ’50’s or early ’60’s, since we’ve seen a cabinet so devoid of Blacks. Look no further that the absence of Blacks on Trump’s cabinet to understand why Blacks vote Demonstrated. Hillary would have 3-4 minimum.
You wrote, “Democrats are better at social justice, helping the poor, investigating police brutality complaints , affirmative action, & funding public education. Those are all pro-life matters as well. The obsession & fixation with abortion is what resulted in the election of racist Donald Trump.”
Sir, I guess if you are willing to do these kinds of ideological gymnastics (such as equating affirmative action and the pro-life movement that seeks to keep babies from being murdered, as if these are equal in importance as well as moral and social impact) then we won’t be able to find common ground here. Certainly not in the comments section… But, it clearly displays how far apart the underlying political presuppositions are between those who are conservative and those who are more liberal.
Since you have asked me to look up somethings on the internet, I will encourage you to do the same. If you are on Facebook, look up the following names and read what they write. In doing so you will discover that there are FAR more black brothers and sisters in Christ that completely REJECT the left-oriented/Democrat ideology you just presented in your response to my question.
Darrell Bernard Harrison
Patrick Hampton
Hikmat Hanna
Mike and Tony Hazakim
Edward L. Smith
Virgil Walker
Shawn Rideau-Scott
George Willis
Saiko Woods
Lonnie Poindexter
Javon Wells
Carroll Bobb Jr.
Samuel Soyoola
Henry Essick II
Karen Simmons
Dumisani Tmesgen Washington
God bless.
Tarheel,
Funding is the issue. Who routinely votes to commit more dollars to aiding & addressing issues related to the poor? The Democrats.
Who is inevitably attempting to cut funding directed to aid the poor? The Republicans. That is well known information. I don’t vote based on that fact. But I know many solid theological conservative believers who vote Democratic based on the heart & help Democrats fight to give toward the cause of the poor.
Dwight,
I understand your point. Mine was that there’s differing philosophical reasons for the way political conservatives and political liberals Address poverty.
Neither ignore it, neither likes to see people in poverty. Neither seems intentionally to keep
People in poverty.
I will point out though that if you look at the cities – specifically the inner cities – where poverty is at its highest… Those places are NOT Led by political conservatives… In fact in place after place after place we see decades of Liberal political leadership carried out by democrat policies… Yet we see, bankrupt cities and states, and more poverty and all that comes with that.
So the argument that Democrat policies are *necessarily* more helpful to the poor is fallacious on its face.
In fact given evidence – people who think that the politically liberal policies are actually more helpful for those in poverty perhaps should reconsider that anaylasis.
I agree Mike Crane.
Dan and Mike Crane: The question was asked and yet not answered. Are you and your church SBC? Silence tells me the answer is no.
This is not a race issue. Never has been a race issue. To try and bring race into this is deception. On the list of issues I presented concerning ERLC none had anything that could even be considered a race issue except the firing of the black lay preacher in Georgia – Eric Walsh – for the content of his sermons while not at work. But the ERLC, Mr. Moore and Black Pastors were silent.
Dan McGhee you left out a few issues. In addition to abortion up to the moment of birth, please add some of the issues below.
But let’s take a few minutes and look at some of the Biblical issues concerning the Democratic candidate. Also read 1 Samuel 8:18 first:
1) Democratic candidate and platform was strong proponent of transgender males in female restrooms, locker rooms, showers and sport teams. Read the lawsuit filed by the parents of around 50 teen aged girls in the Chicago school system to get feel of just how unBiblical and satanic this policy was. Note the new President has rescinded the directive to schools and the Supreme Court has sent the Virginia case back to Virginia courts. This could also end the nightmare of the teen aged girls in Chicago.
2) The Democratic candidate was publicly labeled as a LGBTQ champion by her own campaign and the organizations directly supporting such.
3) The Democratic candidate was a proponent of unBiblical marriage and commended the then Vice President for performing a same sex marriage in the White House. Only two elected officials I am aware of (Judge Roy Moore and Kim Davis) tried to follow Acts 5:29 after Supreme Court ruling and the ERLC via Mr. Moore was critical of Judge Moore and I am not aware of any comment on Kim Davis.
4) The Democratic candidate ridiculed Christian values as old fashioned and in need of upgrade, directly insulted Catholics for positions which are Biblically based. This reminds me of how Russell Moore so calmly published an article to the secular media claiming that Jesus was a so called illegal immigrant.
5) The Democratic candidate publicly stated that she would appoint Supreme Court Judges that would uphold abortion and LGBT “rights” [sic]. Incidentally already the new President has done otherwise.
As I have stated I am just a lay member of a small SBC church, but if we have a portion of the SBC that is condoning issues such as I have listed above – I do hope we have a split. It is not the political party issues that concern me – it is the condoning of abominations. We either follow the Lord and His Word or we follow satan.
I apologize greatly if this response sounds terse, but these cries of race in my view are deception. I love my church, I love serving the Lord in out reach ministries and would just prefer that the divisive ERLC money be put into local outreah and let’s fill our pew up from the ranks of the lost and unchurched.
Immigration-race based issue
Police brutality-race based issue
Tone on racial reconciliation-race based issue
Trumps candidacy-started out making racial insensitive statements. George Bush in essence called him racist.
And this is not a race issue? Ple…………………ase
Dwight, its not a race issue for any of these black people listed right here…
Darrell Bernard Harrison
Patrick Hampton
Hikmat Hanna
Mike and Tony Hazakim
Edward L. Smith
Virgil Walker
Shawn Rideau-Scott
George Willis
Saiko Woods
Lonnie Poindexter
Javon Wells
Carroll Bobb Jr.
Samuel Soyoola
Henry Essick II
Karen Simmons
Dumisani Tmesgen Washington
How is this the case? Why is it that they see the issue differently? The vast majority of them have thoroughly rejected the “police are out to get black people” narrative. Why is that? Sincerely, I’m asking you this question. Now, I’ve heard others answer it by saying, “Well, they’re just obedient negroes. Uncle Tom! Traiter to their race!” Is that what you think? Why don’t you reach out to one of them? Try the last man on the list. He’s a sharp pastor. Or how about the first guy on the list? He grew up in the ghetto and now completely rejects the Democrat plantation that creates a hive mindset of blaming everything on the white man. How did he get there? BTW, he didn’t vote for Donald Trump, either. But, it seems that he understands Trumps concerns to keep our nation safe.
And frankly, to suggest that the immigration issue is “race based” is completely dishonest. It has nothing to do with race and it has everything to do with enforcing our laws as a nation. Even calling the recent ban a “Muslim ban” was dishonest given the fact that Muslims from all over the globe were still allowed into the USA during that time.
BTW, I don’t care one bit what George Bush says. He’s basically New World Order proponent and I could care less what he says. This claim doesn’t strengthen your argument that Trump is a racist… not even a little bit.
Honestly brother, the soul of the nation is at stake. The Left hates this country. They hate that it was founded upon a Judeo-Christian ethic. They hate God. They want to put conservative pastors like you and I in jail for preaching and teaching the truth of Scripture. Trump is an imperfect man, but he is at least smart enough to understand that Christianity underpins our civilization. Whether for right reasons or wrong ones, he seems to realize that if Christianity and its influence is dismantled any further, we will slide completely into the moral abyss. Maybe we are already there? But, at least he man seems to care about these things. He seems intent on helping us with conservative justices. Can you imagine what the SCOTUS would look like with Hillary Clinton appointing them? College campuses across this country are festering hellholes of Leftist/Marxist ideology where you will literally be physically attacked if you say, “I support Israel in the Middle East.” And this is all fostered and encouraged with the Democrat Party. They want boys in girls bathrooms, for goodness sakes!
Brother, I implore you to wake up! Satan is trying to get good, conservative, black, Pastors and churches to side with those who hate Christ because of supposed race issues. Don’t let that happen.
As a brother in Christ, I will stand with you and anyone else who calls the name of Jesus as Lord and Savior. We must stick together even though we won’t always agree on some of these issues. But, I’ve written this hoping you’ll consider and because I love the body of Christ.
Well said, Mike Crane.
Mike Crane, well said indeed. And Dwight, your condescension is telling.
John Strickland: Dwight is anything but condescending, but being a black minister who has been around before you were even born, I would take some wise advice from those of us who know him personally and say you had better listen to what he is saying.
Dan: Lately, the Democratic party has had more Christian values than the Republican party. And isn’t it blaspheming God to have multiple affairs and brag about it, to be xenophobic. To talk about women as sex objects to be played with not once but many times?
Debbie: More condescension and throw in some ageism!
Mike Crane , in another comment section I believe it a blog titled Trump, Moore , Southern Baptist by Jeff Wright you cited some very pointed questions that were never answered. Your questions, my questions and others are never truly addressed if they are even alluded to. I have followed these blogs about Moore and really there is a pattern of non response and even denial of what Moore was up during the election cycle. Rick Patrick provided a great link on the same Jeff Wright blog comments section at 3/2/2017 at 3.39 p.m. that sums up many of the haughty, harsh, condescending and mocking comments of Dr. Moore toward SBC members who disagreed with him. As I have stated so many times, I became aware of Dr. Moore though the secular press and was appalled at his foray into partisan politics. All the blogs, all the withholding and all this fracture of SBC members can be laid at the foot of Dr. Moore. All he had to state is that he found both candidates lacking in his opinion and stay out of partisan politics. The more I found out about the ERLC and Dr. Moore the more I believed they are just not needed. Dr. Moore seems to think of himself as a fearless leader speaking truth to the unwashed masses of the SBC whom he mocked so part of being a leader is paying the consequences of your actions. However, Dr. Moore did open my eyes and I was not aware of the SBC leadership and lack of accountability and transparency. Again I will state if the majority of SBC members knew about Dr. Moore’s comments, his round robin meetings with non SBC groups, the lack of transparency regarding executive benefits, the bankruptcy of the IMB and all the issues I have become aware thanks to the harsh rhetoric of Dr. Moore there would be unrest but the majority as I was are trusting of leadership and do not follow events. The majority of SBC members are unaware of the ERLC for sure. It no longer serves a useful purpose if it ever did. It is now beyond Moore and the whole SBC leadership system need to be reviewed including the CP.
“Debbie: More condescension and throw in some ageism”
Yep! That’s exactly what I am doing.
John: And the reason I did it(well…..one of the reasons 🙂 ) is because Dwight has experienced racism in it’s worst forms that you will probably never experience being a white male. Even if you had been around. So it’s not like Dwight is throwing around the race subject with no knowledge. He has seen it, he has experienced it, as have his friends and family. So again, it would be wise to listen to him because frankly, the words coming out of your computer are grossly wrong. Grossly. Wrong.
Eric,
I don’t like the idea that your questions were not answered. What were they?
And my question to you is: are you part of those who were unhappy with Dr Moore before because he is a Calvinist?
Dwight,
I have listed 11 issues (among the several articles here over the last couple weeks) concerning the ERLC and Mr. Moore and — NO, not a single one is a race issue. Most are simply asking for a Biblical justification or listing a subject and stating I believe the ERLC is derelict in it duties.
The issues that I have raised on immigration are based upon Scripture or lack thereof.
Where does the Lord’s Word say that Jesus was an illegal immigrant?
In Mr. Moore’s interpretation of Deuteronomy 10:18-19 the Hebrew word is (using english transliteration) “ger”. Isn’t that a foreigner in a country as a guest? Am I wrong? Unless I am wrong that would NOT equate to an illegal immigrant in today’s world either.
That is a Scripture issue, not a race issue.
I have asked questions about several issues such as: Where are matching briefs for the other 6 Obama DOJ Islamic mosque lawsuits? Why only this one? The Baptist Faith and message references God. not the false god allah. It has an exclusion for anything contrary to god’s will, false gods seem to be contrary to God’s will. Why did not the ERLC support Eric Walsh the lay preacher fired for the content of his sermons by the State of Georgia? Why hasn’t the ERLC spoken on the repeal of the Johnson Amendment?
This was a partial list.
I am very disappointed by the tone of the discussion. But I did see something today that we all should be rejoicing about. If posting a link is against the rules please remove the following video link. It is a very short video of the President talking about how important God is in his office.
https://www.facebook.com/theconservativetribune/videos/222511494819602/
Roger S. Oldham, EC vice president for convention communications and relations, told BP the EC office has processed dozens of requests over the past year from churches seeking to withdraw from the SBC.
“Pastors seldom call or write the EC offices to express concerns about an entity, so when they do it is notable,” Oldham said in written comments. “Our practice is to refer them to the entity’s leaders or its trustees. In addition to numerous conversations with pastors expressing frustration or even threatening to withhold CP funds this past year, our office processed requests from 49 churches to withdraw from the convention, up from the half dozen or so we usually process in a given year. We grieve each time we send a notice to our entities that a church has voted to leave the convention.”
http://www.bpnews.net/48455/cp-escrow-study-set-to-begin
David R. Brumbelow
Dan,
The problem is “those you say that ‘hate’ Christ, often treat Black people with more respect, love, and dignity than those who say that they love Christ. People are good judges of who ultimately have their best interest at heart. And at this point, the majority of Black evangelicals have concluded-especially under Trump-it’s not the Republicans. You listed notable exceptions & that’s good. I respect individualism, and freedom of thought. I have nothing disparaging to say ’bout others who’ve made a different choice ’bout Trump/Republicans. But just like all White people don’t vote or think the same, neither are Blacks monolithic when it comes to politics. You came bringing those other people up as if I ought to think & vote Luke them. I know of a ton of White people who love Jesus as much as u & I, believe in the authority of Scripture as strongly as u & I, and show evidence of being born again, and the fruit of the Spirit maybe even greater than u & I; yet they vote Democratic, for various reasons. There would be no point in my listing names. It should be understood. So, I’m not quite getting your point. The whole point of my post is that we should not have a litmus test in the SBC regarding voting, only regarding the Lordship of Christ & the ‘2000 BF&M. You seem to equate Republican voting loyalty to Christian loyalty. And that brand of thinking is antithetical to the Kingdom & could cause the SBC to fragment.
I would much rather be associated with the GOP than the homosexual loving, abortion promoting democrat party. Rusel Moore has said some hateful and very un Christ like things about President Trump supporters. He also has advocated for more immigration from countries who’s people want to exterminate us. Russel Moore should be speaking out against a “religion” that vows to destroy Israel along with the USA. Russel Moore needs to step down for the good of the SBC. He’s promoting racial disharmony. God will surely judge him for promoting a false god (Allah). Our God is a jealous God. In the meantime if Moore cares anything about the Church, he will do the right thing and step down. We will leave his judgement up to Jehovah God.
Mike Crane,
“Condescendion”? What exactly are u referring to?
David, why do they have to ask to with draw from the Southern Baptist Convention. Membership is voluntary. All they have to do is stop participating, giving or attending meetings.
That’s a good question. Perhaps to get off the SBC church locator or to get on record for their own purposes that they have withdrawn from the SBC.
Someone should ask.
My guess is a good number withdrew after the Confederate flag resolution passed and wanted to voice their discontent about that situation.
If a church withdrew over the Confederate Flag, I’m not sorry.
Dan,
Yes. Police brutality & justice in the criminal court system are quality of life issues. And if u deny that, there is something fundamentally flawed with your logic. You are correct on this point: that’s where the divide begins, how we define quality of life issues. I’ve voted Republican faithfully since ’84. This was the first year in 42 yrs that I didn’t , because it was impossible for me to vote for a man with a racist history like Trump’s.
The names u mentioned are great. I applaud & appreciate their right to vote their convictions. That’s irrelevant though to why others voted with a different set of priorities.
You are again making voting Republican/Trump a litmus test of Christian orthodoxy & SBC legitimacy. Not so. And this is the divide in our convention. As long as u view anybody who votes Democratic as somehow having less Christin bona-fides than u, we’ll never be as convention respectful & fair to those who are motivated by biblical causes, as well to vote Democratic.
Dwight,
Is it possible for a political party to have a platform that has become so anti-God, anti-Scripture, anti-holiness, that Christians of all colors say, “I can’t support this any longer because it goes against everything I believe as a Christian?”
Yes, it is. And here’s how. You stop believing the lie that the “democrats are for the poor, the minorities, the disenfranchised, etc.” They are NOT for these people other than controlling them and using them to remain in power. That’s the first thing. Run from that mentality because its a straight lie.
Secondly, Christians must choose to vote based on their identity… as a CHRISTIAN FIRST. Now, if you identify as black first, then you will listen to the siren song of lies given by the Democrats that they care about you and love you more than conservatives do. This is because they want your vote. Period. But, if you understand God’s Word, have learned right from wrong as proclaimed in Scriptures, you will look at the party and realize it stands for everything that God is against.
The Democratic party is moving further and further to the Left. This can’t be ignored, and I’m sorry, but black Christians need to recognize this and decided to stand for Christ in this matter. They must choose their identity of CHRISTIAN first over their identity of being black. This is where the battle lies and I know this because I’ve had this conversation with many, many of my African American congregants who have spoken candidly about this particular heart struggle inside them.
And if I may say so, while you’re article is about how this will affect black church within the SBC, we have found where we are located (just outside Detroit, MI) that conservative blacks are leaving black churches because they have come to see this to be true. The church I pastor is now 25% African American and we discuss these things continuously because these matters are not just matters of “politics” but many of these issues are issues of clear, Biblical teaching.
In our area, blacks are LEAVING black churches that do nothing but preach Leftist, Democratic, identity politics and they are finding churches like the one I pastor, which desires the be multi-ethnic and yet we speak the truth in these matters.
In conclusion, I’ll just say this…
Democratic Party:
1. Openly promotes homosexuality
2. Wants to destroy the nuclear family
3. Is becoming more and more Marxist
4. Hates conservative Christianity
5. Loves Islam
And you’re response to the above is “Well, I’m better at sniffing racism than you are and I know that Democrats care about black people more?” No, they don’t. That’s a lie. And as a Pastor, it is your job to teach your people to identify the truth from a lie.
God bless. And please forgive any harshness that may come across here because I don’t intend it to be so. But, at this point, I believe that the only way to discuss these matters is to be direct. The stakes are too high. Let me also affirm you as my brother-in-Christ. Though we’ve never met, my heart is for you, your family, and your church. May God richly bless you!
Dan,
The level of fear mongerinf and ignorance in your post approaches levels rarely seen even on this forum. It’s like you took every click bait article published in the last 12 months and used it to write your post.
To attempt to label any party in the US with the accusations you named is asinine. Are there some people in the Democratic Party that fit a part of your accusations? Maybe. But as a whole. Not even close.
Yes there are several party planks the Dems have adopted that are concerning- abortion chief among them. But pro-Islam? Marxist? “Destroy the nuclear family?” Do you even know what you are saying?
Further, I have learned over the years as I have worked with and listened to my African American friends that there are really good reasons why they feel alienated from the GOP. Maybe is you stopped lecturing Dwight and started actually reading what he is saying you might find some insights.
Dan,
In your first paragraph above you insinuate that the Democratic Party has “crossed the line” to a point of being a anti-God party. Implication being the Republican Party is the only option for genuine believers. I respect your right to that conclusion, although I find it blatantly false, and more importantly extremely alienating to those who find equality important biblical values to support within the Democratic Platform & candidates. Your position though, has become the defacto position of the SBC. Again, if RM is reprimanded or rejected it. becomes the codified position of the SBC. The SBC then becomes an outreach of the Republican Party. And being SBC becomes synonymous with being a Republican. Is that what u really want? Do u really want the SBC so identified and intertwined with the RP, ’till they are synonymous? Jesus said, “My Kingdom is not of this world.” And the biggest problem of this unholy, unhealthy, and ungodly alliance between the SBC & the RP, is that it makes the SBC & Trump, bedfellows. Does the SBC really want to be bedfellows with a Republican President no matter his ethics, morals, marital history, documented racist history and current posture & policy in certain issues? And u would dare declare a RP represented by Trump a spiritual superior Party to the DP? God forbid!!! And if your thinking represents the majority thinking of the SBC, this needs to made crystal clear to all churches & believers. And you are right; those that share your mindset regardiess of race, will gravitate to Pastors, Churches & Conventions of like mind. Consequently, I applaud, celebrate & appreciate all of your Black congregants, and all conservatives. I am a conservative. I probably believe in every conservative principle u believe in. I am not a Republican though. I am an independent & will probably officially register independent soon. I’ve voted Republican for 42 yrs for many of the reasons you’ve mentioned.
But my eyes have been opened now to systemic racism in the RP and among even Southern Baptists that I find equaliy as detestable as any plank in the DP platform.
The Republicans tolerance for police brutality & their unwillingness to investigate & oversee that it does not continue to occur is just as evil as anything in the DP platform.
The current Republican President not appointing any Hispanics, and only one Black to his cabinet is as evil as any plank in the DP platform.
The Republican Party only becoming concerned about & pushing for voter identification laws after losing elections to Democrats, and particularly after the advent of Obama, is just as evil as anything in the DP platform. The constitution doesn’t require showing identification to vote. Republicans didn’t require it either, until they started losing. A court in Virginia or somewhere out East has ruled the RP position on voting identification is racist. If it were so important, why now is it an issue & it wasn’t before Obama.
The RP support for prisons for profit is racist & evil to the core.
The RP support for higher prison terms for crack possession, and much lesser sentencing for cocaine possession is racist & evil to the core. Whites prefer cocaine. Blacks prefer crack. That’s the only reason one carries a much larger sentencing for possession.
The Republican penchant for the disproportionately imbalance in sentencing period, for Blacks…handing out greater punishments for the same crime…is evil to the core.
Neither party is pure & pristine. For u to represent one morally superior to the other is problematic for those of us who view racism equally as evil as abortion & homosexuality. If the Republicans get their racial act together, then u might be correct sir.
Until then, many of us will judge each candidate on their own merit. More times than not, I’m likely to vote Republican for the reasons that you’ve mentioned. But, I respect persons & don’t call their Christianity into question who reach different conclusions for valid & biblical reasons. The SBC & u sir, might consider doing the same. Finally, I recall asking during baby Bush’s campaign, a pastor that in my judgement is perhaps the most spiritual, moral, biblical & righteous persons/pastors that I know, how could he not vote for Bush in light of the DP platform. His answer: his commitment to the poor. For him, that trumped every other issue. He saw it as a biblical mandate to help the poor & through the government. I don’t quite agree with him as it relates to a high priority government responsibility. But, I admired his commitment to the poor. Who am I to tell him his voting habit is wrong & unbiblical. This is your position sir, and maybe the unwritten position of the SBC and it’s wrong & sickening. It may be a good thing though that Trump is exposing it.
Abs, not sure if you saw this earlier from Dan McGhee:
“In this I’m not saying the Republican party is always the answer. There are other options and there are independents.”
I don’t read Dan saying blacks or anyone else necessarily should or should have voted R. I see him aghast, as am I, that blacks or anyone else did or could vote for a Democrat given the correct list Dan gave of what the Democratic Party stands for, chief among them advocating for baby slaughter. But the other things Dan said about the D party are spot on as well and blacks and any Christian should run fast and far away from the D party. As have some black pastors he listed.
Les,
No I didn’t but my comment stands. Democrats are not Marxists, or pro-Islam. In fact, their party platform is opposed to central tenets of BOTH systems. To say otherwise is disingenuous.
Can we not have a reasonable discussion about these issues without misrepresenting the people we disagree with and putting words in their mouths? That’s the same thing non-Christians do to us.
We should be better than this.
I second your comment Absalom.
Excellent comments Dwight. I love reading your posts. As you know my heart aches for this situation and even more at the denials….again.
Dan: You appear to equate pro-human rights for all including Muslims, as pro-Islam. Democrats are pro-human rights for all. Read the statue of Liberty as immigrants are what our country was built on and welcomed.
“Can we not have a reasonable discussion about these issues without misrepresenting the people we disagree with and putting words in their mouths? That’s the same thing non-Christians do to us.
We should be better than this.”
Agreed.
( please consider this as you think about what you’ve posted regarding conservatives and poverty.)
Dan, I totally agree with your statements about the democrats. How black women could abort their children is beyond me. The founder of PP is a hero of Hillary’s. Margaret Sanger started PP to exterminate black children. She said they are like weeds and need to be removed. THERE’S your racism. Why do no black pastors speak out against this? The obama administration was riddled with muslims. The Democrat’s actually booed God at their convention. Hillary laughed when ” under God” was left out of the pledge of allegiance at one of her rallies. I just can’t see anyone who claims to be a Christian being associated with the democrats. But God will judge them as he will all of us. I just can’t see being able to defend myself to God if I was affiliated with a group of people who thinks it’s ok to murder babies. I will have to answer for my sins. I’m very thankful that won’t include abortion or homosexuality.
Is the real issue not his lack of love towards fellow Christians shown by his “smugness” and calling those who disagreed with him heretics? This is according to another view I heard.
“lack of love…” ‘smugness’
“calling those who disagreed with heretics”?
All of those concerns are subjective & on their face, impossible to reach a verdict on innocence or guilt, because you would have to know his heart, to know whether or not he’s guilty as charged. The first two issues are no where close to being worth the time to investigate.
“calling……someone a ‘heretic’? He either did, or he didn’t. And if he did, I’d have to see the context to reach a conclusion regarding innocence or guilt. And even if I conclude he was guilty of unfairly calling someone a heretic, wouldn’t the apology he’s given cover that?
I find it amazing that Moore is being investigated over these matters, but Land’s controversial racial remarks didn’t result in threats of withholding funds, and an EC investigation. Simply amazing. Reveals the heart-a comparison/contrast of how RM is being treated versus Land.
I would challenge John to show evidence that Dr Moore called those who disagree with him heretics.
Footnote that accusation.
Footnote: This is cut and paste of the actual quote:
“Tone, content and inability to articulate any vision outside of Never Trump. His tone in attacking Trump voters where he said they had to “repudiate everything they believe” in his NY Times op-ed, and claiming Trump voters were followers of the prosperity gospel heresy (quoted by Daily Caller). Dr. Moore was also unable to grasp the Lesser of Two Evils moral choice (until he apologized after the election). He went on the Rick & Bubba show and couldn’t even answer their questions about what should Christians do if they can’t vote Trump.
HIs association with the Immigration Table that is linked by Eric Metaxes to the Soros-funded immigration lobbying groups raises some serious questions about Dr. Moore’s progressive social policies. I’d also add Dr. Moore in 2010 gave over $4,000 to a Democratic congressman who voted for Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the House. That isn’t very helpful to life or religious liberty.
Those are some, I think, legitimate issues that have nothing to do with race. Immigration is important. I’m a Rubio voter in the primary and open to a comprehensive immigration deal, so I’m closer to Dr. Moore than any of the Trump voters he derides, but there is something wrong with his attitude. Remember how he talked down to that pastor who asked him a religious liberty question at least year’s convention? Yeah. That isn’t how you lead people.”
John C:
That’s a quote from an opinion piece against Moore, vaguely referencing another opinion piece against Moore which appeared in The Daily Caller in 2015 and which doesn’t actually provide a quote from Moore to substantiate the claim. The Daily Caller piece is very subtle in that it includes an unreferenced and contextless quote ostensibly from Moore regarding the heresy of the prosperity gospel, and then it claims that Moore lumps all (most?) Trump supporters in with that heresy. Notably absent, however, is any quote from Moore substantiating this claim. Nowhere does it actually tie in Moore’s general opinion about the prosperity gospel to any specific statements about Trump supporters as a whole.
The only actual quote the Daily Caller provides from Moore regarding Trump supporters is: “I don’t think polling methodologies do justice to evangelicals because they don’t distinguish between self identified [evangelicals] and [actual] church goers,” the Baptist Ethics and Public Policy Commission president said. “Among serious church going individuals I don’t see very much Trump support of all.” Even this quote raises red flags for me. The use of brackets in a quotation is meant to aid in explaining technical language, filling in missing references (e.g., pronouns), or aiding with a shift in tense, grammar, or syntax. Here, the brackets have added key words to the quote. What was in place of “evangelicals,” and what, if anything, was in between “and . . . church goers?”
But, for the sake argument, let’s just take that quote at face value and assume that there has been no editorializing. Is that quote still relevant to this discussion? Hardly. Remember, this is in 2015, months before the Republican primaries even began. This has nothing to do with the so-called “lesser of two evils” argument. This was, at most, an observation from Moore about whether or not he saw widespread support for Trump, as compared to other announced Republican candidates, from among church going individuals he new before the primary season even started.
I would echo Dave Miller’s challenge to show where Moore has called those who disagreed with him on Trump heretics.
John C: I read a quote from someone accusing Dr. Moore, I read no quote in your comment made by Dr. Moore himself. And you don’t even cite the quote. Wow!
“The only actual quote the Daily Caller provides from Moore regarding Trump supporters is…Even this quote raises red flags for me…the brackets have added key words to the quote.”
And not just the brackets — I did a Google search and found nothing of any parts of this quote apart from its connection to “Evangelical Leader Calls Trump’s Christian Backers Unchristian” in The Daily Caller. While not impossible, it seems highly unlikely that it would show up nowhere else.
That last sentence might not be clear. What I mean is that “While not impossible, it seems highly unlikely that it would show up nowhere else” — if it is a legitimate quote of something Russell Moore said. Where did The Daily Caller come up with it?
So, John, what you are saying is that you cannot demonstrate the truth of your accusation?
An apology would appropriate then.
Trump is proving himself to be every bit the person Dr. Moore warned about. This may not be a controversy much longer…
Exactly what I was thinking Chad.
I’m afraid you may be correct. Time will tell.
Don’t get rid of Russell Moore, it is time to get rid of the ERLC. It, unintentionally I believe, has become an instrument of division and a distraction from what we as Southern Baptist are called to do, proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Although Dr. Moore has made mistakes (in my opinion), keeping him in the fold and decommissioning the ERLC is the only answer.
There are times when affirmative action is a reasonable, if not perfect, corrective to address the inequities created by generations of white privilege. Yet the black believers I know who vote democratic are not elevating the issue of affirmative action above the lives of the un-born. They are simply voting for a party that actually does something to address racial inequality rather than a party that merely gives lip service to the pro-life position. I have been in enough SBC churches to say that racism is tolerated, if not endorsed in many them. These churches still have deacons and Sunday school teachers who stood with Governor Wallace and formed gauntlets to keep blacks out of their schools. And a large number of them have never publicly repented of their racism. And no one is calling out their sin or asking them to give up their leadership positions in these churches. And from my perspective they seem among those at the front of the line to throw Russell Moore under the bus. Perhaps not everyone who opposes Moore is racist. Yet I dare say that racism is contributing to the movement against him.
This posted in the wrong spot. Sorry.
John Wallace, wherever you were trying to post or answer it does show what R. Moore has done. I am seventy, I remember G. Wallace so the Deacons and church leaders still active will not be active much longer. I grew up in the south and in the SBC. There has been a sea level change in race relations and the tension and racism in the SBC is way overstated. I would say that if someone truly feels the SBC and the majority of its members are at their very core racist they should not attend that SBC church, I would not and I am no activist. Again this is where Dr. Moore and his ERLC leadership has gotten us with his leadership style. By the way George Wallace was elected Gov. of Al. twice after he got shot and had a lot of black support. His last primary win for President was in Mi. which I do not think is an SBC heavy state. Again, Moore has gotten the SBC not talking in a constructive manner but creating groups of dissent by design.
It grieves me to see David Hankins pretending to be credible on any level. David Hankins should be the last one providing criticism to Russell Moore, due to the fact that his self avowed mission as the executive director of the LBC is to root out anyone in the convention who is reformed, not the spread of the gospel. Let’s not forget the issues at Louisiana College where Hankins used the president there to do his dirty work and blackmail professors and their families. I know countless other people who have had terrible interactions with him as well.
The only credibility Hankins has is with those who share his soteriological crusade. Its dispicable how he bullies churches in his own convention. The threats he made to one particular church in Louisiana is outragous and certainly not becoming of a State Exec.
I haven’t been a part of a Southern Baptist church in my adult life, but I grew up in one. I’ve been so proud to see Russell Moore speaking out the way he has. I’ve been so hopeful for the direction his words can take the SBC. I really hope they won’t ruin it.
Amen. The ERLC has been great because now we’re actually HAVING these discussions.
I am white, but love biblical social justice for the poor and minorities, because they are God’s positions and commandments. I am licensed and ordained to preach by a large Southern Baptist Church, and have been active in jail and juvenile detention ministries for 18 years. Sadly, I have found white conservative evangelicals in the pews (on average as a whole) to actually hate the poor and minorities, based on their ubiquitous ugly Facebook memes and comments in response to my social justice posts, and their own posts on their own Facebook pages, even well before the recent election cycle. I am about done with it. If even one major black churxh finds it necessary to leave the SBC over this or any other issue connected to different paradigms on race matters, I will have no choice but to also withdraw from the convention. God’s word is clear about racial justice issues, and about how we are to work for racial justice (Isaiah 10:1-3, Isaiah 1:17, Proverbs 31:8-9, Micah 6:8, and on and on), and about our attitudes toward, and our treatment of the poor. But many Southern Baptist preachers (e.g., Dr. Jeffress of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, and others) are twisting the scriptures to justify unbiblical and covetous paradigms in the pews toward the poor (e.g., falsely teaching that government has no biblical role in fighting poverty). God is not at all pleased with the very unholy marriage between the white conservative ‘evangelical’ church and the far-right wing of the Republican Party. Theologians and imminent preachers like Reinhold Niebuhr, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Rev. Billy Graham have been warning against that for a century now. The attitudes and actions in the white conservarive evangelical church have forsaken our Great Commission, and are causing the world to flee from Christians. Christ, and from the church. They have set the cause of Christ back at least 100 years. The world knows a hate group and a voting block weaponized against the poor and minorities when it sees one. I pray rhe SBC will repent, but fear that it won’t, especially if strong exhortation towards racial justice is silenced from the pulpits (not that there is more than a scintilla of it emanating therefrom in the first place). The church should be in the forefront of the fight against racially disparate mass-incarceration, minority voter suppression, and our nation’s 44,000 “Second Prison Laws,” but instead, we aren”t even a taillight, but have chosen to not speak up or lift a finger. And 81% voted for the Party that is actively working to suppress the minority vote. That’s all big-time sin, and God will hold the white Southern Baptist Church and its members and voters accountable for their oppression of the poor and minorities He loves so dearly.
Craig,
Wow!!! Speechless!!! Mic Drop Comment.
Would u give me permission to post your comment on my blog & Facebook.
Yours my friend may be the comment of the century onthis subject. Many Black Baptists are under the illusion that White Southern Baptists don’t understand, and because they haven’t lived our experience, they aren’t capable of understanding why we just don’t blindly vote Republican. You get it my friend. Eureka!!! I found the one who gets it. Russell Moore understands to a great degree; but look at what is understanding & articulation of such is costing him. I’m left in a state of daze at your comment. Thanks.
Dwight, by all means, if my comments are helpful to you, please feel free to use them in your blog. God bless you in your work. James 1:25.
Dwight I appreciate you sharing this. We need to listen to pastors from different ethnic backgrounds and understand their perspective on this.
I attend an egalitarian, Wesleyan/Holiness church, so there are a lot of issues that Dr. Moore and I will never agree on. I have nothing but respect for his consistent message about Trump, though. As for him never calling out Clinton – he didn’t/doesn’t have to. She has never been the person/issue he’s addressing. (I’m so tired of hearing, “Yeah, but Clinton!” whenever someone shares concerns about Trump. That’s nothing more than a deflection).
Watching this from the outside, it is my prayer that the SBC – white members, black members, whatever color members – will choose to move forward in healing divisions instead of becoming more entrenched. Like it or not, that healing is going to involve white Christians choosing to settle down and listen to the concerns of their non-white brothers and sisters. Praying for you all.
Thank you, Pastor Dwight. Your perspective is valuable. I agree, it will be a sad day in Southern Baptist life if Russell Moore is reprimanded, marginalized, or even fired simply for telling the truth.
If you all spent half as much time and energy pastoring your churches as you do writing and commenting on all this nonsense we might not even need the CP anymore. All of this, on all sides, reeks of pride, ambition, and lust for power and money.
You’re here among all the nonsense with us, brother.
Bro I said 2 sentences. Had to rest my finger after scrolling to get to the bottom of the article and the comments, many by the same posters. I have always had the temptation to get embroiled in these kinds of political issues, but I’ve come to believe that denominational politics are more useful to Satan than to our God.
Just thought it was an example of the pot calling the kettle… um… Calvinist.
You said two sentences, but used those sentences to suggest these guys aren’t pastoring their churches?
Calvinist? Red herring much? Yeah that’s what I implied. If you have time to spend all day following this, I’d like to spend a day with you and see how ministry is supposed to be done.
Well I’m not a pastor, I typically spend all day working with eyeglasses in a retail optical environment. So if you’d like to see how my ministry is done, it tends to be rather boring but I help a lot of people see better.
I think using the expression, “the pot calling the kettle black” would have been a bit too on the nose given the original post, so I turned it around in (if I do say so myself) a humorous fashion.
If you have time to read the whole thing, I would take care throwing stones at the people taking the time to discuss this extremely important issue of the SBC and race relations.
John: Again another comment not based on fact. Dwight pastors a large church and does it quite well along with others on his staff. You would be welcome at his church which is beautiful and very well run with Dwight preaching very thought out, Bible based sermons. You know not what you speak of, you are trying to get him to be quiet and that is not how things are changed. I’m sure people told MLK that same diatribe.
“Dr. Russell Moore is essentially under investigation by the Southern Baptist Convention for his accurate, biblical, prophetic and outspoken views regarding race in America.”
That’s a pretty serious charge and one that wasn’t supported in the article.
Moore’s problem is not his positions on race, immigration, mosques, etc.. His problem is that he seems incapable of expressing his views without insulting those he perceives not to agree with him. Just read his various political blog posts and editorials over the years:
1. You want to attend a interfaith rally organized by a Mormon radio talk show host?
2. You support securing the borders and enforcing immigration law?
3. You voted for Trump in the primaries?
4. You have concerns about providing religious liberty protections for a group that has factions committed to the destruction of the legal foundations of religious liberty?
5. You have concerns about immunizations?
If you said yes to any of these, Moore has either ridiculed you, made assertions about the authenticity of your faith or your commitment to the Gospel or your commitment to a biblical worldview, etc…
Protecting Moore against real accountability for his use of his CP paid for position is nothing new in SBC life (re: Paige Patterson’s interesting take on his own authority and SWBTS charter rules of student admission).
What’s new is the statements of prominent churches and leaders who have had enough of Moore’s behavior towards those who disagree with some or all of his politics.
Looking at this another way, if Moore’s supporters are so fragile that they are troubled by an open study of his agenda and his public treatment of others, we have a true crisis of leadership on our hands.
Nailed it. Thanks for your clarity.
Jonathan,
You make a number of allegations concerning Moore. Would you please provide links/citations to Moore’s statements that you characterize as “ridicule”, questioning the authenticity of one’s faith, or calling into question one’s commitment to the Gospel or a biblical worldview. As to the latter (authenticity and commitment), are we not as followers of Christ to humbly call out those things when they defame our God?
Johnathon,
The problem is that many of the people after Dr Moore were after him before any of those things you are mentioning. They were after him because they don’t want so many C’s in power. Were you one of those?
Wow. I never thought I’d see the day when the SBC showed it’s true colors so blatantly as a lobbying wing of the Republican Party, effectively persecuting one of it’s own for upholding scripture above politics. Donald Trump’s actions confirm his contempt for minorities, women, and refugees. Thank God that folks like Russell Moore are calling him out. There’s nothing Christian about this president. It actually makes me sad for the evangelicals that conflate religion with politics to the degree that they can’t see this.
I would say I’m shocked that money is behind this, as well, but that wouldn’t be truthful. It surprises me not one bit. What is it again that Jesus says about money being the root of all kinds of evil?
I believe this may be a real Diet of Worms moment for Dr. Moore, and how fitting – since it is the 500th anniversary of the Reformation. Take your stand, Dr. Moore.
Interesting, isn’t it, that this all starts happening as the SBC begins taking official stands regarding the Confederate flag and the character of a Republican President? God help us, because the Enemy loves dividing us.
Jenny, I’ve been less and less a fan of the GOP for several years, was not a fan of Trump (and still wary of his apparent lack of discipline, etc) and there are several issues with which I agree with Moore (on the substance).
Is it possible that the issue here is more about the cumulative effect of how Moore has addressed those he is supposed to serve? Is it possible to agree with Moore while finding his behavior toward those who disagree inappropriate for one on leadership?
I hope that he can be restored. I hope that he figures out how to graciously disagree with those outside of his immediate circle of friends and associates.
This poisonous political divide among us is Satan’s delight. Well, it’s (the other guy)’s fault. So that justifies assuming the worst motives, nefarious intentions and biblical compromises on the part of our opponents? Can not the Gospel bring together Christians of different political intuitions in a spirit of love and forbearance? Our country has endured one of the most divisive presidential elections in living memory and now we carry on in the same spirit as Christians in the same denomination! This isn’t defending Russell Moore (who I deeply appreciate, but who could’ve have shown much more nuance in some of his comments) or focused soley on one side or the other. I am very much in harmony with much of Dwight’s article but interpreting almost all opposition to RM and the ERLC in terms of racial politics makes some unfair assumptions about the motives of some of the critics and widens the divide. What we need is ample doses of forgiveness and mercy on both sides that exceed our disagreements and bruised egos. It feels like the Russell Moore controversy has pulled back the curtain on a great deal of wrong attitudes on both sides of the political divide. We need both Russell Moore and Jack Graham; we need both Dwight McKissic and Robert Jeffress; we need everyone on this blog post to be part of the same Gospel team and not tearing at each other’s throats. I’m worse than most of you with these issues in my heart and I regret how frustrated this controversy has made me. We really need to stop this.
I think we have reached the point that we as people have thinner skin than we used to, and we cannot be slow to speak when the internet has made us so quick to type.
Dwight Mckissic, yes, by all means, feel free to quote from my comment in your blog. If I can be of any help to you or the cause of Christ in this matter, or to our dear black brothers and sisters in Christ, I want to do that. Thanks for what you’re doing, and God bless you.
parsonmike, Thanks for your response. As I have stated before I am a layman. I have to admit I was not that aware of the Calvinist movement and I grew up in the SBC, it just never came up and was a non issue. I had no idea that R. Moore and many of the SBC leadership position were held by Calvinist. I do not oppose R. Moore because he is a Calvinist but because of his words and actions. However now that I know it is odd that so many leadership positions in the SBC are filled by those who follow Calvin belief, but it is not an issue with me as of now. One question that will never be answered is how much do SBC executives paid and their total benefit package. I was and am stunned at the lack of accountability and transparency at the SBC leadership level. Many on this and other blogs deny R. Moore stated the things he stated and if he did he is sorry. Dr. Moore is a smart man who is great with words and rhetoric . It is easy to find his negative comments about Trump supporters but the narrative changes in answers of his supporters. Why support the NJ mosque zoning issue but not others, especially with Justice Dept. siding with the mosque? Why no support for the SC lay pastor who was fired for off duty sermons? Why no active support for the repeal of the Johnson Amendment ? Why make a case getting out politics (Moral Majority) but then directly rush into harsh opinion in a partisan primary? Why hire a guy for a new created position who got fired from his GOP job for being a rabid Never Trumper? Who authorized the position? Why live in Brentwood Tn. a white flight 94 percent white , high income , not a multi cultural community but blast the average SBC church who may not be a multi cultural as Moore would like but represent their community like Brentwood churches do unless they bus people in or out. Why the quick knee jerk response to Ferguson Mo. before the facts? Why all the associations with non SBC groups that I have found out have a definite Calvinist viewpoint. Why so many” preaching to the choir” meetings and seminars with same minded groups and little contact with the average SBC church.
What would the average SBC member and church “lose” if the ERLC did not exist? These are some of my questions and thanks for your answers, I appreciate it.
Eric,
Thanks for your reply.
I too am a layperson.
But I see why most of your questions were not answered.
You are asking the wrong people.
This is a blog ran by SBC people like you and me, most which also pastor churches. They are not [as far as I know] people who have the answers that you are looking for readily available to them.
In fact, I bet most of them want those answers as well.
This blog is NOT an official arm of the SBC.
It seems that the SBC is not as forthcoming about salaries and practices as we would like.
parsonmike, thanks for your update, I appreciate your comments here and other blogs , was not sure if you were a layman but it does not matter as I like the various perspectives. I am not looking for official SBC answers here but there are many educated, smart and involved people who must have an opinion or can comment on my questions. Many have no problem defending Moore without a lot of facts just statements.
I know I cite my opinions based on what I have learned since becoming aware of Dr. Moore. It is my opinion Dr. Moore uses a lot of nameless, straw man arguments and even does so in his apology. Again, I became aware of Dr. Moore by the secular press, Wash Post, CNN, WSJ and other mainstream media outlets. I did not know the ERLC existed and thought SBC leadership was just to support missions. Actually Moore toned down his public pronouncements compared to his website commentaries and twits especially during the debates.. Then I started looking into SBC workings as much as I could over the internet. I wrote a letter to the SBC about my concerns and received no reply. I will say again if the majority of SBC started following and questioning SBC leadership and directions I think that would be some changes. For example perhaps being described as “in the Jimmy Swaggart arm” of the SBC was a compliment but I did not know it as I was probably drunk and not involved in church since vacation Bible school.
So if I cannot get my answers here and cannot get my answers by official SBC channels where do I get my answers? Dr. Moore blocked me from twitter and I get canned responses when I do hear from the SBC. You would think Moore would sincerely open up a public discussion on a site like this but you know he will not. Dr. Moore did not speak truth to power, the spoke his views to the powerful by representing the powerless who trust their leadership. It must be troubling to realize that 80% if SBC members may have lost their Christian values over politics. When you are the go to guy for Washington Post, New York Times and CNN you know you are saying something they want to hear.
Eric,
I have no idea where to get the answers t your questions.
When it comes to the secular press I simply don’t trust them to report the news accurately.
Maybe, brother, you don’t need the answers. I mean I an curious about many things, but as to needing to know, not so much. No matter what the answers are, it won’t change anything in my life: not where or how I work. Not how I interact with my family or my church. Not how I give to the Lord, either monetarily or otherwise. It won’t change how i pray or read the Bible.
The things that might change are not in my control.But they are in God’s control. So I am trusting Him to work it all out for my good. And for your good. And for the good of every true believer that are affected by these problems and how they are resolved.
But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t ask these questions. Or that I shouldn’t have any input. God uses all of us and all things in life to work out His plan.
God Bless.
Eric represents a growing number of laypersons who have become less loyal to the institutions of the SBC as the leadership of these institutions have become less interested in engaging the laity in meaningful dialogue on important issues regarding the direction of these institutions.
The historical trend lines for CP giving, baptisms, and attendance are headed downward. Our IMB missionary force headcount is down nearly 20% from its high.
Yet, the major crisis is whether or not Russell Moore will get to keep his CP funded job?
If you want some insight as to why laypeople are finding the SBC less relevant to their own lives, this would be a good place to start.
Jonathan, you hit the nail on the head. All of this energy and time about Dr. Moore shows how SBC resources on the ERLC level are spent, a lot of talk with little results. There needs to be SBC organizational changes in accountability and transparency. Again I was shocked when I started following Dr. Moore and his views toward SBC who did not agree with him politically. When I read his book and followed his articles on his website I got the feeling he was more interested denouncing SBC members who disagreed with him politically, socially and were more conservative to the outside world than spreading and defending the Gospel.
That is just my opinion. I find his “we don’t live in Mayberry anymore and that it was never real ” analogy tiresome and not very deep, again personal opinion. Just like his apology when he cited again unknown Christians as the trigger that sent him into his dark rants par for the course. Dr. Moore is the master of the straw man argument. Radio hosts on Christian radio were denounced but not by name or even subject other than Moore felt they were hateful. I do not rejoice that Christians are losing their social and political influence in America and we see the results of this. Yes , we can and will be the faithful but we do have to engage in the world. I see social justice advancement and works creeping into the salvation vocabulary very slowly . Again it is way past Dr. Moore , I think if you want to be a bold , decisive leader and the people do not follow you have forfeited you authority, no matter what you think. If the “average” layman knew Moore’s views , his agenda and his pronouncements they would not want him in a leadership role and would not want to support the ERLC. I was better off not knowing what is going on , it is true ignorance is bliss but once you know you cannot go back to being unaware because this is why we are where we are as an organization.
Friends, let’s all rejoice together that if this man needs an amicus brief signed to help get one of his Satanic Temples built here in America we have an advocate, who will joyfully and Gospel-centeredly, help him. Of course, he would probably need this help because of all the hateful Christians who would oppose this Satanic Temple in their community. But thankfully, Russell Moore will be there to set all the hateful Christians straight in their thinking.
https://www.facebook.com/ThisIsZinc/videos/622649194602417/
Dan, It’s fine to express your views here but since this is an internal SBC matter, I’d like to know if you and other commenters are SBC? Do you have anything in this against Moore/ERLC other than your opinion? THanks.
Dan: Your site says your church is an independent non denomination so I am reading you are not Southern Baptists?
William, I suppose you remember that my church is unaffiliated. But also note that my posts in this thread are informational in nature.
One bit of information was a link to the SBC.net search that will pull up Dan’s church. He’ll have to explain whether that is legit or in error, though.
Our church is SBC. For now.
So, now that I’ve answered your question, let me ask you one, OK?
If this Satanic Temple was being built in your community, would you be OK with the SBC, through the ERLC’s Russell Moore, signing an amicus brief on behalf of the Temple?
Dan,
Is it not a proper role for a follower of Christ to stand for religious freedom?
Matt Curtis,
You asked:
“Is it not a proper role for a follower of Christ to stand for religious freedom?”
It depends on how one defines religious freedom.
Biblically defined, such freedom is found only in Jesus, the Truth, whom in knowing Him, sets one free indeed. All other worship, outside of Jesus, the crucified and risen Son of God is slavery, not freedom.
If you mean by religious freedom, the freeness to worship the God or god or gods of your choice, there is nothing in the Bible that either by example or command tells Christians to seek such freedom for others t worship false gods.
There is nothing in the Bible , either by example or command, that tells Christians that they are to use secular means to secure freedom of religion for themselves or for worshippers of idols.
There is, though, in the Bible, a statement that tells us as Christians NOT to use the weapons of this world to fight spiritual battles. An example of what we should not do, for example, is not to use a town council to prohibit the building of a Mosque because Islam is evil. Or not to prevent an Islamic cemetery. That our battle against the forces of darkness should not be through secular means but using spiritual weapons, one of which is prayer.
The Bible also tells us that to desire the freedom of worship [for ourselves] is a good thing and that we are to pray to the Father that He might move in the hearts of men and Kings and those in authority so that we might live a quiet and tranquil life.
That life is not a right but a blessing from God. For we know both from the Biblical witness and from the historical witness that not only through time, but even today, many of our brethren undergo persecution for the Gospel. And that our Lord plainly told us that all those who wish to live only will suffer persecution.
EDIT:
this:
all those who wish to live only will suffer persecution.
SHOULD be this:
all those who wish to live GODLY will suffer persecution.
This controversy is another example of why pastors and church leaders should not delve into politics and comment about specific candidates. Note how much time, energy and effort this controversy takes away from the biblical message.
parsonmike, Whatever I write or whatever questions I may have or who I disagree with or who I vote for I am certain I am saved as I accept Jesus as my savior. I believe all of the people who post here are saved by the blood of Christ and they are as sinless as I am in the eyes of God, Jesus paid it all. So the good news is the good news and always will be. I do like the old saying “work like everything is up to you and pray (live) like everything is up to God”. As I get older in this life I do find many of the items I use to worry about grow “strangely dim” as I think about our eternal home. Dr. Moore is part of the family of God as I and you and all true believers in our risen Savior. I might have doubts about many things but not about my salvation.
I have always liked that the Southern Baptist Convention provides a home for political conservatives who would feel unwelcome in a lot of protestant churches in the U.S. I feel very strongly about my politics. I disagree politically with most black Christians but have found many to be as good or better Christians.
I didn’t like the inerrancy debate because it failed to accept the fact that the Bible no matter how true and how much of it is intended to be literal, one cannot honestly state that it is 100 percent literal. If you do, look up the definition of parable. To purge convention officials that are doctrinally wrong to an extreme would be in keeping with the practice of every Christian denomination.
To purge pastors who are is in large part a violation of what makes us different. But we must tread very carefully when enforcing political conformity. Imagine if the Catholic church not only excommunicated people who believe in abortion but now every one who questions global warming or the peaceful nature of Islam.
We would be up in arms. We have or should have always known that while white and black Baptists are very similar theologically, we are usually very opposed politically. We must concede that no matter how strongly we hold our own political beliefs, they are not 100% in conformity with the Bible.
Neither are the political beliefs common to black Baptists. This is not a political club. It is not a church for Republicans. Have we forgotten that most of us had grandparents or great-grandparents that would roll over in their grave if they knew we had abandoned the “party of the working man” for the “party of the rich.”
It is natural for us to embrace the policies of conservative Republicans given the tremendous economic growth of the South following the Civil Rights Movement. Should any of us doubt that this might well be due to God’s lifting his judgment from us for our shameful treatment of neighbors and fellow Christians and Baptists whose only collective sin is that their ancestors were relatively more resistant to malaria and lived next to Muslims for whom slavery is a religious duty. Must we forget that our ancestors’ mere participation in that enterprise doomed our region to untold suffering.
I can never support politics of the left and would find attending a church that did very difficult. But we must not forget that we are a church and not a political club. Black baptists may not share our politics just as they haven’t shared as fully in our good fortune.
We are not Hindus. We don’t believe a low status birth is punishment for sins committed in a previous life. Being black in this country is like a grindstone. It sharpens some and grinds others down. Let us not be the grindstone.
I’m moderately impressed with Dr. Moore. Completely unimpressed with the SBC. “A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways.” — I aim that verse at the SBC as a whole. You aren’t going to overcome racism while hanging on for dear life to anti-womanist theology. It isn’t biblical, it isn’t necessary for any reason short of male control issues, and it irreparably harms your witness to the watching world. As does racism. I don’t envy anyone trying to fight the fight within the SBC, including Dr. Moore. I hope he goes all in and calls out his denomination on women’s ordination.
Russell Moore is a complementarian.
As I feared… and underscoring the general disconnect the SBC seems locked into.
Complementarianism is Biblical. Started in Genesis. Seems consistent with the New Testament teaching. I have no interest in controlling my wife, and in fact, male headship is hard because I’m supposed to sacrifice for her. But as with every Biblical doctrine, sinful humans abuse it and corrupt it. Doesn’t make it less true.
Do any of you think that The Washington Post and The New York Times would have printed Russell Moore’s letters if they had been in support of voting for Donald Trump? No, they used him as a pawn in their agenda to dispirit evangelicals into staying at home and not voting (or voting, but not voting for either of the two major parties candidates) so that the end result would be that Hillary Clinton would be elected and the Democratic Party would regain control of the Senate and reduce the Republicans margin of control of the House of Representatives (if not ideally regain control there, too).
If evangelical voters had heeded Moore’s warnings to not vote for Trump, we would be talking about the liberal judge which President Clinton had nominated to the Supreme Court and the Democrat majority in the Senate would be trying to passing a budget which would include federal funding for abortion as that was a new plank in the Democratic Party’s convention last summer.
Some how, all of these possible political realities were ignored by Moore and others in the “Never Trump” camp. One wonders if they understand that “Free Abortion on Demand without apology” is now the public policy position of today’s Democratic Party. In fact, just yesterday, Howard Dean said emphatically that there is no place in the Democratic Party for those who have pro-life beliefs: http://hotair.com/archives/2017/03/08/dean-no-room-in-democratic-party-for-pro-life-voters/
The reason that there is now a pushback by Prestonwood Baptist and others is because of Moore’s own words. In an interview with Bloomberg News, https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-10-09/the-evangelical-civil-war-an-interview-with-russell-moore he made comments comparing the younger generation to the older – Specifically he said, “There’s a clear generational and theological divide within religious conservatism. The engagement of the old-guard religious-right establishment is very different from that of the younger, more theologically oriented, multi-ethnic, religious conservatives of the next generation.” It’s ridiculous to make a sweeping generalization and proclaim that the younger generation is “more theologically oriented.”
Further, he goes on to describe those he would prefer to be representing: “I think the fundamental issue is that younger, gospel-centered evangelicals tend to be much more suspicious of overt political activity. The sort of pastor who will hand over a church directory to a political candidate, or have a candidate speak in the pulpit, is very much in the old-guard line. The sort of evangelicals who are going to be at a Passion Conference or participate in a Gospel Coalition around the country would never do that. ”
The reality is that as leader of the ERLC, Moore doesn’t get to select those he wants to represent – Pastors Robert Jeffress and Jack Graham are just as much constituents of the SBC as are the younger generation who participate in The Gospel Coalition or Passion Conference. In fact, the churches which Jeffress and Graham pastor contribute a lot to the Cooperative Program which pays the salaries of the ERLC.
The question which is bigger than Russell Moore and what he has said about those who supported Trump is, “How can the ERLC represent the increasingly diverse SBC?” It is hard to say what there is a consensus on political ideas outside of opposition to abortion and gay marriage. Obviously, this election has shown that there isn’t a clear consensus on immigration issues as Trump carried 80% of the white evangelical vote, so when the ERLC attempts to speak on that issue, there is going to be a pushback.
Even within the voting patterns of the SBC, there is a diversity of views as there is an increasing diversity of membership. While those of the CR generation who are now in their 60’s, 70’s and 80’s have voted reliably for Republican candidates, statistics show that the majority of the black and Hispanic membership have voted for Democratic candidates – (Barak Obama received over 95% of the black vote nationwide) – While, they are prolife, themselves, the Democratic candidates whom they have voted for are for abortion rights.
Given this reality, it is hard to see how the ERLC can be said to be the voice of the SBC. It could be that all of the controversy over Russell Moore will be the catalyst to bring the end of the ERLC.
David,
I have 2 major points of contention with your argument.
First, it doesn’t matter to me why The New York Times or Washington Post chose to publish Dr. Moore’s pieces. What should matter to you, me and Prestonwood is whether Moore’s argument was sound and whether he accurately presented a biblical, Gospel-centered viewpoint in a respectful way. You fault Dr. Moore for allowing himself to be used by those newspapers for wrong purposes, yet you argue that he should have stood silent when he saw that God’s church was being enlisted by a deeply offensive candidate to win an election and grasp power. We can argue elsewhere about whether it is biblical to choose the lesser of two evils, whether Trump will turn out to be what many of us believed and feared him to be, or whether we would be in worse shape long-term if Clinton had been elected. But, I don’t think you can make a biblical case that what Moore wrote, or how he wrote it, was contrary to Scripture.
And that brings me to my second point of contention: your suggestion that Dr. Moore has an obligation to represent and reflect the views of all identified Southern Baptists. Isn’t his first and highest obligation to be an ambassador for Christ? And, if he believes that some Southern Baptists have forgotten their first love, should he not be loyal first and above all to the teachings of Scripture? Should he not remind all of us of our first love?
So do you wish the SBC was more episcopal or presbyterian in polity in all levels (national, state and local)?
JP,
You’ll have to explain to me what you’re asking.
But, put simply, I want Christian leaders who will exhort us to live out the Gospel. I think Dr. Moore has been doing that.
It seems from your post that you would favor top down authoritarian roles from agency heads. Maybe I read it incorrectly, but I gathered that.
RM needs to stand for the gospel in his role. But he doesn’t nor any entity leader in the SBC have any biblical or pastoral authority over me or you (unless that person is my pastor). We have cooperative humility as co-laborers.
But i read your language associated to his actions to echo that of pastoral leadership in a local church…which RM is not. He represents the entire SBC to the current admin/Congress and speaks to the SBC on matters of importance from that representation. He doesn’t get the authority to determine things like who to vote for. Ultimately, even though a pastor has a biblical role and authority where he serves to teach and guide those people in such matters, in reality he doesn’t get to determine who a person will/won’t vote.
Thus my question to you for those in all levels of SBC leadership…do you want all of those levels to have that type of polity?
JP,
The system doesn’t appear to allow me to reply directly to your follow-up question, so I’m posting this as a reply to your original question.
I’m not suggesting Dr.Moore has pastoral authority over churches within the SBC. Nor have I seen anything suggesting he sees his role that way. But, both as an individual follower of Christ, and perhaps even more so in his appointed role within the SBC, he has a duty to exhort faithful submission to God and the Gospel. That necessarily means he will offend some. The questions that have to be answered then, is whether what he said or wrote in a particular instance conformed to the truth and teachings of Scripture, and whether he delivered it in a manner consistent with the Bible. While he’s certainly fallible, I’m not aware of any statements in this particular context which have failed to meet either of these criteria.
A) Authoritarian?!?! What world are you living in? Turn your gaze right back onto Donald Trump if you fear authoritarianism.
B) Donald Trump was a plant on behalf of his friend Hillary, who came in to destroy as many Republican primary candidates as he could, who did everything to try and lose this thing, and wound up winning because Hillary was just so putrid a candidate. If anything, Trump is the one who was supposed to throw it to Hillary.
C) I have no problem with what Russell Moore said in the above quoted example. None. I have REAL problems with any proclaimed Christian, Republican or Constitutionalist who cast a vote for either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. I question their discernment, their understanding of the Constitution and their principles–the principles that elected George W. Bush largely because of Bill Clinton, who looks like a saint next to Trump! Just because I don’t understand you, JP, doesn’t mean I can’t coexist with you. It’s only politics. My wife cast the same vote and I’ve told her what I thought. We’re still married.
But what Russell Moore said was tame in comparison to what I wish he would have said. I remain proudly #NeverTrump and I won’t vote for him next time, either.
Thanks Matt. The number & content of blogs/discussions shows the division we have. Where you and I stand regarding those comments may/may not be different. But we can pray that unity will prevail such that the Gospel is advanced.
Thanks Jim. No I don’t respond out of fear of authoritarianism. I do respond that our polity isn’t such, shouldn’t be, & Matt’s comment struck me as such. The ERLC’s stated mission is to represent the SBC. Some think RM didn’t properly do that while others wish he would’ve done more. A divide indeed that prayerfully can be healed.
David, good comments and I will tell you now all the good, salient questions you asked will not be answered. You will be told you are mistaken in what you think Moore was communicating, that Moore is without a doubt speaking Biblical truth not getting into politics and that is his job to lead the SBC where he thinks they should go. If you disagree you do not understand what the Bible teaches because if you did you would know Moore was right. For example common sense and knowing the political climate then and now , knowing the liberal slant on the NYT , Wash Post and other mainstream media who gave Never Trump Moore a platform does any one think they did it to advance the Gospel or that was the reason Moore accepted the invites to spread his political views as the spokesman of the SBC not an individual as Graham, Jefferies and Falwell , they did not represent an entire entity as R. Moore is the spokesman of the SBC. Go back to the several blogs here and review the comments that ask questions or bring up tough issues. They are not fully addressed. Dr. Moore brought this needless debate in the SBC community because he believes the Bible supports his political and social beliefs, only his viewpoint, very much like many of the liberal mainline churches who have made politics and their view of social justice the core of their efforts not the Gospel.
Well said, Eric.
*wipes the water off his computer monitor that he just spit out of his mouth* Ok we’ll put this straw man to rest and answer all of David’s questions.
1) “Do any of you think that The Washington Post and The New York Times would have printed Russell Moore’s letters if they had been in support of voting for Donald Trump? ”
The media was in full support of Donald Trump during the primary season, or were you even watching? They LOVED him. They pre-empted everything to bring you his latest press conference. And yes, they printed a lot of both support and the opposition.
2) “The question which is bigger than Russell Moore and what he has said about those who supported Trump is, “How can the ERLC represent the increasingly diverse SBC?””
Well it’s clear that Trump and his administration reflects something far less diverse than even the SBC. The fact of the matter is that the ERLC is not supposed to represent the SBC. Their declared purpose is leading the culture to change within the church itself and then as the church addresses the world. “Change within the church itself.” So yes, there might be some disagreement as they represent Biblical values and principles related to our culture and politics. You can disagree all you want (diversity, you know), that’s your right. But nothing Moore said about Trump was wrong.
Two questions. Matt Curtis and I have taken the time to answer both.
Factually wrong. Listen to Russell Moore’s interview on NPR. He unjustly, inaccurately and inappropriately (for his position) takes a political stand against Donald Trumps candidacy. He is also introduced as the head of the SBC. I have long been opposed to Russel Moore and with hold my tithe from the SBC. Almost as disappointing as Russell Moore’s leadership is the immediate knee jerk reaction to turn this into a “racial” issue. One of my most vehement criticisms of Russell Moore is his dragging the squalor of secular politics into our Christian brotherhood and sanctuaries. The author of this article leaps directly into that pit and now tries to drag all of us with him.
Support the withholding of funds and remove Russell Moore from leadership!
After reading all these comments it seems to me that there are some mighty confused people on here. This is a mess that ought not to be. It seems to me that both sides of this argument have their own best interest at heart and not the living and spreading of THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST. Jesus never relied on the Romans or Jewish leaders to spread his gospel or support his teachings or do his work. He did it himself against such harsh opposition that it led to his death. Likewise the apostles and many Christians both then and now. Neither Jesus nor the apostles put their trust or hope in any man or group to save them. But in GOD alone. This is what we need to and must do if we are going to to be saved from this wicked and sinful world. Lets be about the unity of the Church. ONE MIND! ONE BODY! ONE SPIRIT! Lets get out of the world’s business. I believe you are all intelligent enough to understand what I’m saying. May God give you peace and understanding.