I’m not sure which convention it was, but it was during my time as a pastor in Virginia. I was deeply discouraged and considering throwing in the towel, for reasons that I won’t go into and simply do not matter now. A friend and I went to the Pastors’ Conference together and sat through sermon after sermon. I was amazed, feeling as if God had singled me out. The theme was perseverance. These men preached sermon after sermon about enduring in hard times, sticking it out when you were ready to quit. God used those two days to encourage me and give me the lift I needed.
I can’t remember the last time I heard much but complaining or dismissive comments about the PC. Many of us spend more time in the display areas and fellowshipping than we do listening to the messages. And there is a heaping helping of complaints.
- It’s the same men year after year.
- There is no proportionality or balance in the lineup.
- There’s not enough exposition.
- There are too many non-SBC speakers.
It is not my intent to either agree with or dispute the validity of these complaints, only to point out that there seem to be few people who love the SBC Pastors Conference anymore.
Our little bitty band of bloggers has been batting around our brainchild and would like to broach it with this bigger bunch. It was raised some years ago but abandoned for financial reasons, but the way the PC is run financially has changed and we now believe that this is has become a possibility. It is a leap of faith and frankly, the very idea scares us a little. We would like to share our proposal here as an idea, and hear the response of the blogging world. We will, perhaps, tweak our idea based on the input we get here, so your voices carry weight.
We are planning to run a smaller church pastor as president of the Pastors’ Conference this year in hopes of having a very different kind of event in 2017 in Phoenix.
It is not our purpose to be critical of those who have labored faithfully and diligently in recent years, but we believe a fresh start can be a good thing for the PC. Some may see this as some sort of political move. It is what it is. We think it is time for a change and we intend to offer that change. If the pastors vote for the change we offer we will do our best to provide an encouraging PC in 2017.
The PC has little structure as best we can tell. It is an informal organization with no bylaws or board of directors or formal guiding principles. So, what we are doing is within the rules – you can’t violate rules that don’t exist.
Here’s the “New Voices” plan for the SBC Pastors Conference in 2017. Let us know what you think.
1. One of us would run for the president of the Pastor’s Conference this year. We have honestly not decided who that candidate would be. We are releasing our agenda, our guiding principles before we announce a candidate. What we are doing is not about a person, but about a way of doing things. It’s not about a person but about the way we want to do things.
2. Every single speaker on the stage next year in Phoenix would be a Southern Baptist pastor whose church is actively involved in SBC work and missions and affirms the Baptist Faith and Message 2000. None of us believes that the SBC holds all truth – in fact, we believe there is much to be gained from listening to those outside our denomination. But this is the SBC Pastors Conference and we believe we can find a solid lineup of preachers from within the ranks of SBC pastors.
3. We would follow these general guidelines in selecting preachers for the conference. We do not regard these as the law of the Medes and Persians but as guiding principles.
- No one who has spoken in the last five years or so would be invited to speak. There are plenty of good preachers in the SBC, we do not have to use the same small group of preachers at every conference – even if they are great preachers.
- For the record, we have agreed that none of us involved in this group will be preachers.
- Our preachers will be diverse. We will seek preachers from old line and new work states, seeking geographical diversity. We will seek younger and older preachers. We will seek racial and ethnic diversity. We do not have quotas, and our emphasis will be on quality biblical proclamation, but we will also seek to include a variety of preachers, styles, states, and perspectives.
- It is our intent that while we will strive to have balance in the soteriological perspective of the preachers who are invited to speak, this debate will have no place in the 2017 Pastors Conference. We will avoid those who have been partisans in this conflict and simply preach God’s word.
- We will focus on smaller and medium-sized churches, those who are usually ignored when invitations go out for conferences and conventions. We’ve not set a hard limit, but we will focus on finding preachers from churches that run 500 or fewer on Sunday morning, perhaps up to 750. Can we not find a dozen excellent preachers among the 95% of churches that run 500 or fewer on Sunday morning in the SBC? Are the 150 churches defined as megachurches the only churches with pastors worthy to preach? We think not.
4. We intend to follow an exegetical/expositional format. We will select one of the shorter books of the Bible (Philippians, Ephesians, etc) or perhaps a segment of a longer book (the Farewell Discourse, the Sermon on the Mount, etc) and the preachers will divide up the text. Over the course of the two days we will preach through the book or passage using verse-by-verse exposition.
If elected, our most difficult task will be selecting the preachers. We will begin by asking people to tell us, “Who is the best Bible expositor you know?” We will share the burden of listening to messages and picking out those preachers who will be invited to preach in Phoenix.
5. As we understand it, speaker’s fees have come to be one of the higher costs of the Pastors Conference. This will not be so. Let’s face it. Pastors like you and me would travel at our own expense for the privilege of preaching at the PC, right? We intend to reimburse the preachers’ expenses and if able give a small honorarium. If someone demands a big fee, we will just move down the list to the next man!
These same basic guidelines would apply to the musicians who would be invited to lead us.
Our Goal
We the 2017 SBC Pastors Conference to be about good biblical preaching – verse-by-verse exposition and Christ-centered worship. No politics. No promoting SBC business. Nothing that happens on Tuesday or Wednesday should have any part of what we are planning to do on Sunday and Monday!
So, you tell us what you think. Do you think there are 12 or 13 Southern Baptist pastors who can exposit the text well enough to interest you and draw a crowd to the Pastors Conference in Phoenix? Should we stay the course and keep doing what we are doing or should our little band of blustery bloggers try this?
The floor is yours.
Brother,
I like every point. I think it is a tremendous idea. I hope it happens. I have nothing to add nor change. That is all.
I’ll vote for you.
I did not lie. I forgot to click the follow-up comments box.
I’d be miffed that I’m not in your blogger band if it weren’t for the facts that:
1. I’m not sure I write for you frequently enough to qualify, and…
2. I think you’re producing better ideas than you could if I were brainstorming with you.
Here’s the thing, Bart. We all agreed that those who were part of our little rebel alliance couldn’t get invitations to speak.
This leaves you on the potential guest list.
As part of the cabal, Bart, that’s exactly the reason we’ve left you out. And we thought maybe you were too respectable.
I like the concept. My only concern would be, why limit it to expository, verse by verse preaching. There are examples of expository, expository topical, and topical preaching in the Scriptures, so any of those methods of preaching the truth of God’s Word should be acceptable.
And, of course, you know we discussed this over ataya in Chief Gaspard’s guest house!
My buddy Doug nodded approval from the wall.
It was a joke, fellas. I’m not really miffed. 🙂
And yes, Dave, I recall in January my proposing the idea that going through a book or something similar for the PC would be a fabulous idea. I’m happy to see that I’m not alone!
Sounds good! I will vote for whoever is nominated
Last year was my first Pastor’s Conference, so I have less to go off of than the rest. I found the messages and challenges to be inspiring. However, I do agree that it would be greatly encouraging to pastors of smaller churches to see men from their walk of life preaching and sharing; someone who understands what it’s like to not have a personal assistant helping with appointments and sermon illustrations.
As a northern Southern Baptist, I would truly appreciate more diversity in all areas, but especially geographical diversity. I believe more men would be encouraged to join the work here in areas where Southern Baptists are a minority (I’m on the IL/WI border) if they heard pastors from those areas share the blessings that come from these challenging areas. I don’t necessarily care who the candidate is, but the platform sounds great.
I agree with the sentiment. I like everything that I am seeing. I also agree that the 150-200 churches here in the north would be considered medium to larger church size. It can be very difficult to connect with stories from the 2000 and up – lol. The PC has been a wonderful time over the years, but I have been spent some (maybe more) sessions out in other venues. This would be a welcome change.
Good idea. I like it.
David
Yes and amen!
All of our Elders (4) in our 130 size church are phenomenal preachers! I would love to see small church pastors be represented.
Great article!
You get my vote.
I like the idea as well. Glad to see the initial positive response, here and on other social media.
A sensible proposal I support!
Does that mean Benny Hinn and Joel Olsteen will not be speaking?
I love this idea Dave! I nominate Bart to be the PC president!
I would suggest Jim Hamilton of Kenwood Baptist Church, Louisville, Ky, Wayne Spanhanks of Springhill FBC, Longview, Tx, Brad Wheeler of University Baptist Church, Fayetteville, Ar, Josh Mauldin of FBC Fayetteville, Ar, Curtis Woods, Kentucky Baptist Convention asst.Executive Director, K. Marshall Williams, First Nazarene Baptist Church, Philadelphia, PA, Dean Inserra, City Church, Tallahassee, Fl, Paul Sanchez, Emaus Church, San Jose, Ca for starters.
I like the idea for a reason you didn’t mention (at least not explicitly): we need to change the aspirational model of ministry we are putting forward to pastors. Right now it’s easy to get the impression that you only matter if you are at a mega. I like inviting solid expositors from the range of churches you outlined. I do wonder what the response will be as far a attendance goes (especially in Phoenix), but principally, I’m supportive.
Love love love the proposal.
Does “diversity” extend to Deaf pastors? There’s a lot of us and we are routinely ignored!
We have discussed the possibility of a deaf pastor, would love to hear your suggestions
Okay, Stephen, I have a straightforward question.
How would a deaf preacher preach to a hearing audience? I’m displaying my ignorance here, of course. I know that we do it the other way – sign language interpreters – but is it regularly done backwards?
We actually did discuss this – it was Todd’s idea, I think. But the logistics of it were not something we were completely sure of.
It is indeed done backwards. There are some like me who can do it both ways, but it’s not recommended. Talking in 2 languages at once is pretty rough on the speaker. Usually an interpreter will voice for the signer.
If I had to put up a short list of preachers, I’d say:
John Wyble (Va, Deaf)
Aric Randolph (Tn, Deaf)
Chip Penland (Fl, CODA)
Tim Bender (Ky, Deaf)
Danny Hinton (Ky, CODA)
“CODA” – Child of Deaf Adult, raised in a signing culture but hearing.
Oh, and only one of those guys is an avowed Calvinist, in case Rick Patrick wanted to interrogate me.
In any list of five prospective SBC preachers, one SHOULD be a Calvinist. I would be certain of that on any list that I was compiling myself, for almost that number (10-20% of the members in our churches) are Calvinists. It is right to reflect their existence in the SBC in a proportional and balanced manner—without the use of any mandated quotas.
By the way, I don’t interrogate. Blessings, brother.
Trust me, Stephen, if this comes together we won’t be applying Calvinism Quotas or applying artificial formulas.
No one should be chosen OR excluded because they are, may be perceived as, a Calvinist.
The truth is that because of the needless microscope on the issue of reformed theology – one or both of the above standards is going to be applied no matter who is doing the selecting. It’s just the way it is now.
Brilliant idea. May your tribe increase and be successful.
Just an observation, but in regards to the stipend/honorarium/ect there are many bi-vocational pastors who simply could not afford to go to the Convention if they were required to pay. I also know a lot of “full time” pastors who also would have their budgets stretched if they were had to pay their own way.
Therefore, I would humbly suggest that the proposed above be amended, that PC speakers compensation be limited to a decent hotel room for length of the Conference, airfare to and from, and a small stipend for food. Cap it at those costs (likely 1000-2000 depending on airfare), and I think you should be golden.
I believe the proposal includes covering “expenses” so hotel/airfare/food would be all part of that. I believe the PC starts on Sunday evening, so they might have an additional dollar amount earmarked for the churches where these men pastor, to cover an alternate preacher in their absence.
We fully intend to help the pastors who speak with their expenses. That is in the post.
I really LOVE the proposal…A Pastor’s Conf Coup would be tough to pull off. I also think it might be nice to have one person speaking who is not SBC, perhaps from close to where the SBC is that year….a nonSBC seminary in the area, etc. I believe having a nonSBC person on the pgm can broaden everyone’s horizons a little.
IF this does not FLY (which it likely will not) and the hint is not taken to include these concerns in the planning for 2017 (which MIGHT happen) then another option would be another Pastor’s Conf at a nearby church or inexpensive/free venue. I would certainly support that too.
I wouldn’t call it a coup — just a modest proposal for 2017
I am not a pastor and have not been to the Pastor’s Conference in 10 years +/- but that never stopped me before, so….
How about someone preaching on the actual state of SBC churches overall? Speaking of the average attendance %ages … about 33% in Alabama … and the number of people who join on our terms and then seldom attend and how that does not seem to be making disciples. How those people seem to think that’s OK, primarily because it is. How about preaching about the reason why nobody I’ve asked has ever given me a correct answer … in terms of our core beliefs … as to why one must be immersed to join an SBC church? And by “nobody” I’m including deacons and Sunday School teachers.
I’ve got a pretty good idea why this is never gonna happen. The attendees are mostly pastors, and nobody really wants to face the fact that they are the cause … actively or passively … or at least a major contributor to, those problems.
As they say, no snowflake ever thought it was responsible for the avalanche, or a raindrop for the flood.
Bob, I am curious…why do you remain a Southern Baptist? I am not trying to be combative here – I am really curious. You are always very quick (Not that this is bad) to bring up the many faults of SBC church’s and preachers yet I do not see any real solutions? Again, please know I am not trying to be abrubt or unkind, I am really serious here, why would you choose to be part of something that is in your opinion so wrong?
Simple. It’s where my ministry is, in our local church.
I keep mentioning that the lack of discipleship needs to be dealt with. And that cannot happen unless it is acknowledged. And despite appeals to the folks in Nashville, nothing changes.
Until we run short of money. Or until Baptisms are down. Then we normally get explanations, such as a recent article I read; an IMB explanation as to why baptisms are decreasing.
Considering that God is our source of supply of every person that walks our aisles and submits to that ordinance, why isn’t anyone asking why He is not sending us the people the way He used to? But nobody seems to be asking that question.
Hey … if it was about being in a denomination I enjoy and tickles my spiritual fancy, I’d go back to the PCA. I’d have a LOT of fun first time unknown tongues manifested in some sort of church gathering …. kind of like when that dreaded scourge hit me one time pronouncing the benediction at an SBC Deacon meeting.
Thanks for your reply… “It is where my ministry is” would be a woefully insufficient reason for me to be a part of a church that partners with a group (denom) that I perceived to be as errant and deficient as you view SBC church’s and the men who pastor them. (Although I am still unclear to how you know so much about them being that at the tops you maybe have had contact with the smallest of samplings of their makeup) If it was me, and I was you (and it clearly is not and I am not) I would trust the Lord to firmly plant my ministry in a church and denomination that was as superior as my own understanding and practice of such things therefore I would not have to be a part of something so deficient. As for the PCA – they are a good group – they would be blessed to have you back. Blessings to you and yours Bob.
Just so you won’t be able to say “nobody” any more.
1. Baptism IS immersion. Non-immersion is not baptism.
2. To refuse to be baptized is deliberate disobedience against Christ, who has commanded us to immerse disciples and to be immersed as disciples.
3. The person in deliberate, unrepentant disobedience against Christ is subject to church discipline.
4. The person subject to church discipline ought not to be admitted into church membership as though he were not subject to church discipline.
QED
Bart, count my five adult children who walk beautifully with Jesus as “deliberate disobedience against Christ” and “in deliberate, unrepentant disobedience against Christ is subject to church discipline.”
I of course understand that you are, well, Baptist and have your view on what does and does not constitute a valid baptism. But I would hope that when you encounter say, PCA young adults attending your church your tone in person is a little more pastoral than what you wrote here.
God bless.
They walk beautifully with Jesus except for having refused to be immersed as scripture commands. I would tell it to them in precisely that way. Otherwise, the requirement that they be baptized in order to join our church begins to sound like a requirement that they be re-baptized to join our church, and that would be very poor theology indeed, since there’s no such biblical thing as rebaptism.
In other words, if I thought of it more softly than that, my choices would be to stop being a Baptist or to be someone who purloins preferences and traditions as barriers to church membership.
You know, since the widespread recovery of New Testament immersion, not a single new denomination has arisen taking the pedobaptist view of things. Only those “legacy” denominations trying to hold on to man-made traditions of the past have held onto infant sprinkling. When churches start with a clean slate, believers’ baptism has practically a 100% rate of making a convincing case to people.
You need not think of it more softly to be kinder when conveying your view. And I do not agree that those are your only two choices.
“Only those “legacy” denominations trying to hold on to man-made traditions of the past have held onto infant sprinkling.” As Big Jake said, “Not hardly.”
Not hardly? Well, then. Name names.
Then again, don’t. We’re hijacking the thread.
Agree. This is not the time and place for an immersion only discussion. I tread here very carefully and never bring it up and never try to convert anyone on here to my view. Happy to do so on Facebook.
We differ obviously. I still have great respect for you Bart based on the body of your work I have become familiar with over time.
God bless.
Bart,
It is not an either or, IMHO. You can and should stand by your interpretation and church requirement. And you can also be more pastoral–and what I mean by that should be self evident, but I’ll say…not come across so harsh. You said, “to refuse to be baptized is deliberate disobedience against Christ.” i.e. to refuse to be immersed is **deliberate” disobedience. Having raised 5 children in a covenant baptism context, I can tell you that when you would come at them with “YOU ARE **deliberately** being disobedient…you would simply be less than pastoral and you would be wrong. Assuming your view on immersion is correct, a covenant baptized (I know you disagree it is baptism) child in no way should be accused of deliberately disobeying Jesus. Pastorally, patiently try to help them understand why your view is correct. But to accuse them of deliberately being disobedient IMO fails to understand where they have come from and is needlessly harsh.
Having said all that, my children have many Baptist friends and close family. Thankfully they know their bible well enough to know that immersion, while certainly permitted, is not required.
God bless.
I agree with Bart theologically and Les pastorally.
A believing person who has been a Presbyterian all of their lives, and now seeks to join a Baptist Church, for example, could perhaps be accused of deliberately disobeying – but more likely should be taught that even though their disobedience was not deliberate as they were doing what they believed to be right, but regardless of intent they have in fact been disobedient and need to repent and rectify that.
The Christian who is been in, a Baptist Church all his life, being taught, for example, that he should be faithful to his wife who then goes out and commits adultery is unequivocally deliberately disobeying – I think there is a little nuance here when relating to “Covdnant Baptism” – but only in regard to the word deliberate. I do believe that To not be immersed in baptism the after salvation is certainly disobedience – use of the word deliberate, In this case, I think requires a little more care.
That said – no one should be allowed to join a Baptist church without being baptized as a believer by immersion.
*Covenant Baptism
Tarheel,
Great words brother. Very pastoral approach.As I have indicated, a church that believes in credo immersion only should by all means stand by that and insist in only that. I would love to see a more loving approach in how that is communicated to those who were raised in a different denomination with sincerely held beliefs based on how they have interpreted the scriptures.
In general, I like the idea. I do think you’re overthinking it some. But I’m good with that. My only beef, or recommendation is this ….
I would not make it SBC only. Opening the door to Greg Laurie, Tony Evans (and it doesn’t have to be the big name guys) helps us. We don’t need help being SBC. We need to tap into the angle of “the SBC can DO, or REACH, or BE in a non-denominational culture” which is thriving. In other words, we don’t want to appear SBC only if we don’t have to. We don’t have to sacrifice SBC uniqueness or theology, yet we only need to be separatists where we have to be separatists.
Alan, the range of opinion on being “ecumenical” (that’s a dirty word for us Dallas Seminary guys!) varied in our group.
We are not looking to set a policy for all time, just a one-year experiment. This year, we decided to stick to SBC Pastors only. Again, we are not saying there are only good preachers in the SBC or that non-SBC guys have nothing to say. I don’t think that.
But for our purposes, an SBC-only selection pool was essential for a number of reasons.
Ultimately, though, here is our working premise: 95% of the churches in the SBC run 500 or fewer on Sunday Morning. The speakers at ALL of our conferences come almost 100% from the 150 to 180 mega churches and our boards and schools (and outside big-name speakers).
We believe there are 12 or 13 speakers in SBC churches WORTH HEARING who can exposit God’s word faithfully. For this year, we are staying inside the family.
Given the high proliferation of multi-denominational conferences, I would suggest the SBC Pastor’s Conference might be the one and only place that being SBC only should happen.
I didn’t say be “ecumenical.” Using the guys I mention or others are conservative, inerrantists. But I get your point. It’s just not mine.
I agree with all you said and understand it. It’s just not my point. My point was different.
Just curious. Does anyone remember when the first SBC Pastors’ Conference was, who the speakers were, and nature of presentations?
No idea.
If I were a betting man, I would put money on William Thornton knowing the answer.
Haven’t the foggiest idea.
I like the fact that this article generated a lot of comments by people I haven’t seen comment here before. Miller is onto something with this. It might help if it were disclosed exactly what the honoraria are for current speakers.
I have a book, “The History of the Southern Baptist Pastor’s Conference.” I will check when I get back to my office but I am sure M E Dodd started the pastor’s conf. I’m thinking in the 40’s. The book has speakers and topics for each year.
It seems like Dodd was Pres of the PC for many years.
Thanks. It would be helpful to know the original vision for the Pastors’ Conference and to see if the current format is on-track or drifting from what those folks had in mind.
Max, The name of the book is “The Story of the Southern Baptist Pastor’s Conference.” M.E. Dodd started the pastor’s conference inn 1935 and was president of the conference until 1949, however, Herschel Hobbs presided over the conference in 1949 for Dr. Dodd. The first pastor’s conference was held in First Baptist Church, Memphis.
Dodd said the purpose of the pastor’s conference was for others, “to see and know Jesus as Savior and Lord.” Dodd said the conference would deal with, “pastor’s problems – spiritual, missionary, evangelistic, doctrinal and practical.” Concerning the practical problems of pastors there was a list of do’s and don’ts for pastors at one of the conferences. Number 1 don’t was don’t gossip about the brethren.
Dodd further says, “It was designed to be a preaching ministry in which the brethren could hear some of our preachers and receive inspiration therefrom.” Laymen dotted the roster of speakers from the inception. For many years each speaker was assigned a specific topic to preach on.
Finally, Dodd said of the conference, “It would avoid all problems, debates, resolutions, leaving them to the convention and also promotions of any interest, however good.” A pastor’s conference with no promotions!!!!
Based on the brief history of the PC provided by Dean, I think the proposals can return it to its roots. I like it even more.
Wait, Dave wasn’t at the first PC?
He was, at that time, past his days of newly adopting things that the young whippersnappers were doing.
He was. He is just too old to remember.
I hate you guys…in Christian love.
I think it’s a FANTASTIC idea! Let’s hear it for (and from) small church pastors!
I believe it is a wonderful idea. It is unfortunate that this has not been the case in the past. It is a SBC PC; so, there shouldn’t be pastors from other denominations. There are other venues for ‘inter-faith’ relations. As a pastor’s responsibility is to tend and feed His flock – it’s about time attention is given to the smaller churches. And agreed, pastors from these congregations don’t work for the wealth of the world, nor peddle the Word of God. It is from faithful men, such as these, that will edify others in attendance from small and large congregations. It is time for us to change the tide from things being ran like a business, and more to the truth of the Mission to make Disciples through relational mentoring. Though we worship corporately, we are not a Corporation. The way bureaucracy has defined success has run contrary to the core of Christ’s Church and what it means to be a Bible-Believing Christian. Of course there will be staunch criticism from those who follow their own way, rather than The Way. But, if SB congregations are to be led by SB pastors, who believe the Bible – we must gird up our loins.
If they want to PC to be well attended stop using it to push the convention and giving more but simply minister to tired and weary pastors who could use some lifting up. This is what it used to be. It has not been that in a number of years.
Agreed. In recent years, it appears that the use of “celebrity” speakers has been focused on drawing a younger crowd, rather than ministering to and encouraging a cross-section of SBC pastors. John Meador, president of SBPC 2016, said he is “hoping to draw Millennial pastors to the conference to exhort them to press on” (Baptist Press). Last time I looked, SBC pastors spanned several generations.
Only in “recent” years? It has been full of “celebrity” speakers (and many non-SBC) since I’ve been paying attention, or since at least the late 80s. I believe your issue is with the particular “celebrities” and who their pastor-friends are, and what ideas they do or don’t support.
I stopped in the early 2000s. Even in recent years, even though a few more guys who look and think like me began to be included, I just don’t really see the point. This idea is an idea I would support.
I love this idea! Something that I was recently invited to preach at was a Homiletics conference in Grand Prairie Texas. They had two preaching representatives chosen by the different school staff members from 5 of the largest seminaries/Bible colleges in Dallas-Fort Worth. Maybe in the group of Pastors that are invited you find a few from seminaries/Bible colleges who are pastoring or planting that could represent the future of the SBTC. Either way, this sounds great.
They can represent the future of the SBC, and SBTC! What can I say, I love Texas!
I like this proposal. The Southern Baptist Pastor’s Conference should feature 100% Southern Baptist preachers. I especially like your bullet point promising to make an effort toward greater diversity, yet without the use of quotas. I believe in this kind of approach. Balance and diversity and proportionality do not require quotas. If you can change the Pastor’s Conference to something like this, I might be inclined to attend once again.
Could not agree more. If I could them to do the same at our state level I would love that too. You have my vote, assuming I have the money to get there!
Question: Are you going to do some sort of publicity campaign to promote this? There’s lot’s of avenues to get word out before hand. I would be afraid if you would wait until the conference you wouldn’t make it. Even a hand out or something at the confernce with the points you mentioned. Can you do that? Is that legal, I wonder, to pass out handbills?
We should do that. A one-pager and hand it to everyone explaining why we want to do this. There is no rule against it.
This blog right now is our main publicity.
You could do a rap video to help promote it but some Baptist state papers might object. After all, it’s tricky.
Word
Wow.
What about an old-fashioned broadside? Printed out and lacquered to the walls?
Skywriting.
We are thinking of using a Gospel Blimp.
(See how many of you are old enough to understand that one.)
One of the funniest books I’ve ever read. Heard about it in the sixties at youth camp from Don Hammer, a church member who was our camp preacher. Then I found the book in the Baylor bookstore while in college. Through its entertaining imagery, the author (whose name I can’t recall) made some devastating points. Excellent satire.
I like and support this idea. As a candidate is selected, please keep us in the know so that we can spread the word to others. Thanks!
This is a great idea. Hope you will announce your nominee soon to be sure we are all aware of who it is.
I’m all in
David Miller,
I support this idea 100%. Will support it financially also. The SBC really needs this. Look forward to attending the inaugural PC.
What about, in addition to more “ordinary” pastors, bringing in “ordinary” guys to lead the music? There’s every bit as much celebrityism there as in the speaker lineup…
Agreed. Some folks show up just to hear the music celebrities, then exit. Having “ordinary” preachers and worship leaders on stage would provide a measure of how serious the attendees were just to be at the conference, rather than be entertained. Of course, God has a way of using the ordinary to effect a super-ordinary gathering of His people. Some of the best sermons I have heard in my 60+ years as a Southern Baptist were by surrendered servants of God who had never written a book; THE best worship song I ever heard was from a crippled farmer who played a hymn on the harmonica – a genuine worship experience!
We need some cowbell.
And if we get elected, I will bring a cowbell and play it, in my lime green suit.
Hmmm … all of a sudden, I no longer have a concern about putting Christian celebrities on the PC platform, rather than ordinary people!
Is it clear that I neither intend to wear the lime green, nor play cowbell.
I guess not. Attendance may plummet but I still like the proposal.
If you read the post carefully, it is our intent to do precisely that.
I think those are great ideas.
But I haven’t attended a SBC or PC for 20 years now. They lost their relevance to the ministry of my church a long time ago. I was 40 then. 60 now and at the same church for 25 years.
But, I wish you success in your plan.
I’m totally for this too! Great idea! Get ‘er done.
Yes yes yes!
I’d support this move. And I’ll be in St. Louis to support it.
I think that this is a wonderful idea. I have been thinking about something like this for a long time. State convention pastor’s conferences would benefit from this as well. One thing I know for sure, I do not like the VP of the Pastor’s conference being the heir apparent for the presidency, because that does produces the patterns we are seeing.
I know lots of preachers in the 500 or less range who are outstanding preachers, but they are largely unknown because of the current system.
Honest question, Do you think people won’t come if they don’t see a big name on the bill? I admit to scanning the list and thinking I want to be there for this or not that one. I do that at the state level pastors conference too. Do you think a lack of a big name will hurt attendance?
Luke, that’s a valid question and one I’ve thought about some myself. I think there will be some who make it less of a priority to attend because they don’t recognize many of the names. However, the thing that overcomes that drawback, in my mind, is that we have the ability ahead of time to clarify what we’re trying to do and why the slate of speakers will be quite different from what people are used to seeing.
We’ve seen a lot of people in this thread and on social media express their excitement about the possibility of going in a different direction. Maybe people enthusiastic about the idea make up for the other group who don’t show because of the lack of celebrities.
Dave Miller,
Lime suit,
Cowbell,
If he wears it they will come.
If he plays it they will come.
The motto for Dallas in 2018 might be:
In Dallas, there will be more cowbell.
Perhaps my thoughts have already been expressed above, but I will add them anyway. It seems to me that anything that will encourage pastors to faithfully preach the Word expositionally is a course that should be advocated. So, I agree with your recommendation. And, I live and pastor a small SB church in Arizona. I am looking forward to the event.
After reviewing the “speakers” for this year’s PC, all “big” names, one wonders why one would want to go – save for the fellowship. Do the organizers believe that Chrislebrities and a catchy theme will be the draw?
Okay…. Since you stated your case so well, I’ll preach. ?
Nice
You know how someone who wins the lottery suddenly has a million best friends? I’m guessing that if this did happen to succeed, we would suddenly be surrounded by best friends who would seriously offer what you just did lightheartedly.
It will never happen but I’d like to see the PC make their entire budget available: sources of revenue, amounts given by SBC entities, private donations, ad sales, sponsorships, etc.; expenses including honoraria and expenses paid to all speakers.
I agree William. I think it should be done at every level too: from church up to each SBC entity. Many just show block items and this is okay but a full breakdown should be available for viewing, probably online. I am not suggesting anything is amiss but I believe in oversharing to avoid any appearance of impropriety and to make it easier for those interested to take a look.
I would attend, and even oreach, but as a tent maker, there are no guarantees that I will be in Phoenix. But this is guaranteed. Ever Sunday I preach to between 90 and 125 people, and Jesus is always lifted up as King of kings and Lord of lords, that all may know Him.