We are in Orlando determining the direction of the SBC for many years to come. We will elect a president who will guide us for the next couple of years. That may not be our most crucial decision, but it will reveal something about who we are. We will vote on several motions. I think that our response to Dwight McKissic’s motion on racism will reveal how much progress we have made in racial issues. Of course, the GCR will be the al turning point. Will we embrace the vision the Task Force has put forward or will we turn back and hold onto the status quo?
But there is another question behind these questions. What is the true SBC majority? Which vision, which ministry model, which theological outlook really represents the majority in our convention?
There are several possibilities here. I remember many years ago hearing Vance Havner opined that the majority of Southern Baptists were unconverted. A scary thought, isn’t it – that the true majority among us is unredeemed? I hope that is not true, but for the sake of this discussion, we must assume that the SBC majority is born-again children of God.
But who is the majority in this convention? The megachurches? The small churches? I would like to reflect on that for a few moments.
Les Puryear has put up a website with 150 or so signatories which has laid claim to the SBC Majority mantle. The majority of Southern Baptist churches average fewer than 200 in attendance. This, according to Puryear, is the majority. But a recent study published at “Between the Times” showed that 70% of Southern Baptists attend larger churches. It seems that a majority of churches are smaller, but the majority of Baptists chose larger churches. So, who is the real majority?
There is a simple answer to this question. The true Baptist majority is the majority of messengers here in Orlando for the SBC Annual meeting. Majority. It is the messengers at the Annual Meeting who decide the direction of the convention. We are conservative today because a majority of messengers at 30 consecutive conventions voted for conservative candidates. This gathering of believers who represent churches across this country form the true majority.
Who will be president? The SBC majority will tell us today. Will we support the GCR? Only the messengers know. It is a great privilege to be able to hold my ballot in the air and be part of the decision-making process for this great convention. Every church; big or small, north, south, east or west can be a part of this process, a part of the majority (or, perhaps, the minority – who knows?). I am excited about the privilege of being a part of this deliberative body.
The true SBC majority will be in the West Concourse of the Convention Center tomorrow, wearing badges and wielding ballots.
Everything else is theory, rhetoric and conjecture.
“Every church; big or small, north, south, east or west can be a part of this process”
Only the poor SBC churches are excluded. The ones that have so little and would rather give to missions than buy plane tickets and hotel rooms.
That in the year 2010 the Southern Baptist Convention sill requires it’s cooperating Churches to spend thousands of dollars and travel thousands of miles to attend a convention in order to be represented in the making such important decisions as the ones now being made Orlando is just absurd.
No, the voice of the Majority of cooperating churches in the SBC will once again not be heard at this convention… and I seriously doubt it ever will be.
Grace Always,
Dr. Chapman just urged all 24000 churches under 200 in attendance to save up and send just one messenger. This is doable!
I understand what you guys are saying. But, my point is that the majority that determines the future of the convention is the messenger majority.
We can debate who is the “majority” all day long. But the messengers ARE the majority as long as our polity is what it is.
I suggest we prepare a motion for the 2011 meeting allowing internet voting.
With all due respect to Dr. Chapman.. I would to ask just how many millions of dollars were spent by the SBC and the churches sending their messengers to this years convention in Orlando that could have been saved and spent on missions if the SBC would just embrace the modern age and end this outdated method of doing it’s business.
The above is not just rhetoric… How many millions have we spent over the years on these Conventions that we will give account before God for?
If we moved to a more modern system then every cooperating church, regardless of there geographical location, could have their voice heard. Every cooperating church would be more informed and engaged with the work of the convention. And we would save millions of dollars for missions.
I keep saying this year after year… WHY NOT DO THIS?
Grace Always,
Greg, I remember someone else saying, “This woman could have sold her anointing oil and given the money to the poor.” We know that Judas really had not concern for the poor at all.
In your case, I know the motive behind your post is more honorable, but there is a part of it that misses the point.
First, your post ignores the value of fellowship. Contrary to what some my think, most people attend these meetings for the “between business fellowship,” and for the experience of being with other brothers and sisters in the faith. Unfortunately, there always seems to be enough “business” to balance the value of the fellowship. That’s another matter.
Second, we could always apply this to about anything in our churches. Why not just make DVD’s and have people come by and pick up “worship on the go.” We could sell our properties and invest in a small recording studio. All the millions saved on utilities, etc. could go to missions.
For these two reasons, I feel your proposal may be a little short-sighted, even though on the surface it may appear to have some merit.
Here is a plan that might work to get us started: how about every Southern Baptist skip one Sunday afternoon meal and donate the savings to the IMB. Here, the sacrifice would have both spiritual and material value.
Matt,
Reality Check for us all…
Fact #1— Passing the GCRTF recommendations and the election/exchange of one set of bureaucrats for a new set of bureaucrats will not make the desired “Great Commission Resurgence” in the SBC a reality.
Fact #2 — The vast majority of cooperating churches in the SBC are currently, at best, nominally plugged into and excited about the work of the SBC.
Fact #3 — Until we (the SBC) reconnect with the leadership of each and every cooperating church in the SBC, we will never see these churches excited again about the work of the SBC and the “Great Commission Resurgence” will soon be relegated to histories trash heap of missed opportunities.
Fact #4 — We will not reconnect with the leadership of our cooperating churches in the SBC, and we will not see a “Great Commission Resurgence” until we are willing to listen to the voices of the leadership of every church in the SBC.
Grace Always,
Greg, great summary. In this regard, I think Morris Chapman danced around it a bit . . . the key to the Great Commission is not a great convention (though that helps) but the Baptist on the pew. Without Mr. and Mrs. (and Ms.) Baptist, nothing else really works.
If we don’t have a big convention, I can’t be rebuked for my bad handwriting.
Now I’m famous for something!
Doug, possessor of the worst handwriting in the SBC
Brother,
Regardless of handwriting, yours was a very worthy amendment. The reasons given for it’s impracticality were weak: cost of time and energy, inability to sort out confidential information promised to be held secret from all other comments, etc.
Please! Plenty of money and time has been spent so far. They are smart enough to figure what can and cannot be disclosed.
They did not want to disclose it because some of the information would reveal their long term agenda or some other such controversial matter.
Lord willing, this 45 year old might live to see the day when the records are unsealed–a 15 year cliffhanger. Again, this is the Great Commission not the Warren Commission. They clearly have something to hide.
I wasn’t there at that time. What was Doug’s amendment”
I believe Doug understood Dr. Mohler’s position oppsing unsealing the recordings due to certain testimonies by persons who were promised confidentiality. At the same time, he reasoned that ALL of the proceedings surely did not fit in this category and that Baptist journalists felt more information was needed to understand the work of the Task Force.
Thus, he proposed (by means of his now infamous penmanship) that a group get together including representation from the press, the Historical Commission, legal counsel and the Task Force in order to release any information that did not compromise confidentiality.
Al had already spoken against it, so Danny took a turn, and messengers defeated the motion overwhelmingly, much to my disappointment.
I got in the building just in time to vote for unsealing the records, and lost. I think that Doug’s amendment made lots of sense.
Greg,
In the interest of full disclosure you should know I serve on staff at Woodstock, so that probably makes me quite biased, but I wanted to share my thoughts with you briefly.
Habakkuk 2:2 says, ” where there is no vision the people perish.” The GCR isn’t a mandate or the end-all solution to all of the SBC’s problems. The TF has never claimed it was. The GCR is a report written by long-time SBC folks in collaboration with agency heads and those in the field. The TF itself was compromised of many varying opinions. The end result was a report which casts a vision – a vision that we can all rally around – penetrating the lostness.
The next step will be entity heads determining how best to implement the vision as it relates to their work. I would contend that the best thing we could do is to pray that God would give them wisdom to determine those solutions.
I don’t know you, but I am confident that your heart is to indeed see the lostness penetrated. Rather than seeing things from a negative viewpoint, why not join me and thousands of others in praying God would unite Southern Baptists around the vision of penetrating the lostness here in the US and around the world?
Let’s pray Eph. 3:20 and ask God to do more than we could ever ask or imagine!
Much Love Brother!
DW
Dallas White
Creative Catalyst
FBC Woodstock
(typed on an iPhone, sorry for any typos!)
Dallas White,
Thanks for being somewhat honest and letting others know about your bias. That aside, how can there be unity when the President of the Convention asked for anybody who had problems with the report to “rot in the wilderness?” I miss the warm fuzzy nature of that sentiment.
Also, Woodstock gave exactly “$0.00” dollars to Annie Armstrong last year. I wonder how many thousands ministries (or ministers) at your church received from NAMB in that same year?
Yes, the church did give $200,000 plus to other designated projects at NAMB. But that could not be counted as CP giving, but now can under Great Commission giving.
It is that “one” single issue that drove the mega-church pastors on the committee, because it was one way to concretely measure they contempt for certain agencies.
If the purpose for the Report was to “rally the troops around the Great Commission in a unified effort” — they failed absolutely in my opinion . . . regardless of the vote.
When you judge Woodstock by the facts (CP giving, Annie Armstrong giving which was zero, and Lottie Moon giving which was meager $26 per attendee) I think it seriously brings into question the motives of the appointed task force.
It is true, a couple task force members did come from churches that did much better then Woodstock, but only a few.
For the record our Annie Armstron offering in 2009 was $900, or $60 plus per attendee. Lottie Moon was well over $100. So, I am a little disenchanted by the TF performance in this regard. This causes me to be skeptical about how they will pressure and manipulate boards through nepotism to make the “referral,” a mandate.
Dallas,
Thank you for your very gracious words… they are “well received.”
In the interest of full disclosure for me as well… I have followed the formation of the GCRTF recommendations very closely and have when asked given my input into their formation. The GCRTF recommendations have my “Full Support” and, for the first time in a long time, I am excited about the renewed vision God has given the Southern Baptist Convention.
I suppose I need to “clean up” my original comments that have been taken in a negative light. These three short statements I think will do that quite sufficiently:
1) The GCRTF Recommendations have my… “Full Support!”
2) New Leadership is now in place… “Let’s get to Work!”
3) Reengaging the local church… “Is not an Option!”
Grace Always,
Tony Cartledge has an interesting take this morning at hisblog.
This former editor of the BiblicalRecorder remembers BoldMission Thrust.
Within the SBC World, Greg Alford in comment 8 above gets to the point.
It may be that when push comes to shove, many local Bapstist churches are looking for a kind of Baptist Statesmanship that Duke McCall and Roy Honeycutt had; and Al Mohler and Ronnie Floyd may not have those gifts.
I remember John Baugh once said Paul Pressler was not a gentleman. It may turn on that kind of temperament.
Billy Sunday, whatever his gifts were, was not noted to my knowledge for denominational administration.
Do check http://www.tonycartledge.com and the discussion going at SBC Trends at baptistlife.com/forums
Matt,
I’m a little disappointed you saw my post as only “somewhat honest.” I attempted to disclose exactly who I was and share only verifiable facts in my post. To my knowledge I did that.
You have raised a variety of other concerns, and I would encourage you to take those concerns directly to our team of pastors at Woodstock. Simply shoot an email to any one of our senior staff members and I’m confident they could speak to your concerns.
My greatest concern is that you have painted Woodstock as a church that does not care or fund mission work, and that is simply not the case. I have been part of a short term trip each year for the last 5 years. Each year my team consisted of no less than 50 others, and each trip was no less than $800. Members at Woodstock fund these trips, and there are probably somewhere around 40+ short term trips each year. In addition, Woodstock sponsors numerous families in the field with no help from the cash-strapped IMB.
I do not speak in an official capacity for Woodstock, but as one who has both been on and given to missions work I am blown away at the certainty with which you speak.
Come to Woodstock, spend one weekend with us and then you’ll begin to understand our heart for our city and the world. I live in a one bedroom apartment, but I will find you a place to stay! Come see for yourself the heart of our pastor and our people – I think you may be surprised.
I know this hasn’t answered any of your concerns, but as I do not speak (on this site) as an official rep of Woodstock I’d encourage you to contact one of our senior pastors.
Much Love Matt!
DW
I’ve already communicated with the pastoral staff of Woodstock and, just like your post, they did not address the issue — such as giving $0 to Annie Armstrong. I agree Woodstock has many “independent” mission projects. That’s part of my issue. Independent does not mean Cooperative. If Woodstock chooses to be an Independent Baptist church I fully support that, but don’t say you support NAMB missions, for example, and give $0 to Annie Armstrong.
It is this type of shell game that really frustrates a small church pastor like myself that sees Johnny Hunt’s words as empty rhetoric. He has placed his name into the Celebrity mix so he must then stand beneath the lights of the stage.
Woodstock members had an axe to grind (with the former discharged NAMB president as a member) with NAMB and they ground it partially by participating in the Geoff Hammond witchhunt and sending $0 to Annie Armstrong.
As a small church pastor my concerns when raised over a year ago, were summarily dismissed by the Senior staff of Woodstock.
Now, here’s my point: I don’t have anything personally against Johnny Hunt. So far, nothing has been proven as to any misdeeds. What has been proven in my mind is the obvious: Woodstock was not supportive of NAMB when Johnny Hunt was President asking churches to support mission work. Now, Johnny Hunt has manafactured a way to allow Woodstock’s designated mission giving to be counted as CP giving. In the process, the Convention is deeply divided.
After 32 sacrificial years of service in the SBC, I have problem with that. However, I do not have a personal problem with any of the personalites beyond the words that they speak when they take center stage in SBC life — especially when they pronounce a curse, as Johnny did, upon anyone who might raise a question.
Thank you for enteing the blogosphere and allowing opening up this discussion. I hope for the best. But, I don’t intend to wait 15 years to discover the truth about the Task Force.
I’ve been involved in SBC churches for the last 30 years (which also happens to be my age); and I’ve been a small-church pastor for the last 6 (and by “small church” I mean small enough to not be able to pay the pastor much or have any other paid staff).
Obviously, churches like mine would be hard pressed to support a single missionary, let alone a group. Hence the purpose of the CP: to allow us little churches the opportunity to fund missionaries by cooperating w/ other churches.
Personally, I would rather be in a position like Woodstock, etc., to be able to support missionaries ourselves/fund internal missions trips, but that is not the way the current ball of finaces bounces.
It’s great that we can cut checks and send them off somewhere so an organization can send 5000 missionaries to the ends of the earth and we can say, “Hey, we’re doing great commission work.” But it also misses the point of the great commission… that all of us are to go, make disciples, teach, and baptize.
The problem(s) w/ the CP is that 1) It takes missions out of the hands of the local church and if the missional attitude is not heavily encouraged by the pastors then it turns the great commission into simply ink-on-paper; 2) There is little to no accountability between the missionaries, mission fields, and the local church–yes, we have the SBC meetings, etc. where we elect officers who appoint committees…trustees…etc., but that tends to be where it stops. On a local level, we are sending our money (God’s money) to people/palces that we have little knowledge of/information about; and 3) not so much a problem w/ the CP itself, but w/ some people in the convention–the CP is basically held as an idol: if it’s not supported by a high enough percentage from local churches, then the churches aren’t doing God’s work, etc. Last I checked, the Bible said “Go and make disciples” not “Go and support the CP,”… the CP is a tool, and that’s it. We can debate until we’re blue in the face how good of a tool it is, but…if we find a better way of doing misisons, then we should go with the better way and leave the CP behind, simple as that.
(Now before I get accused of making a false dichotomy, I do realize there are more than these 2 choices, but…) …I would much rather see a church give 3.5% or 2% or whatever to the CP and support their own missionaries and fund their own local, national, and overseas trips; than a chuch that can boast of giving 10% or 15% to the CP, but the members do little w/ misisons themselves.
(typed but not proofed)
Michael,
I think you make some really great points… If I have time later I will interact with you more!
matt2239 “Woodstock members had an axe to grind (with the former discharged NAMB president as a member) with NAMB and they ground it partially by participating in the Geoff Hammond witchhunt and sending $0 to Annie Armstrong.”
We did?
I am just a lowly member of FBCW who stumbled upon your nice presentation of “love” toward others. Well if we are all (FBCW members are as a horrible as you imply) at least we work in unity.
Jesse, I understand your animosity toward me for pointing out the obvious. I’d be a little ticked off myself.
That does not change the facts of the matter as have been stated. Thank you for speaking for the people of Woodstock, which I never addressed. People in earlier posts wondered about a “hidden agenda” behind the GCRTF Report. I guess you cleared that up.
If I understand you correctly: Woodstock members (self-described by you) were aware of the animosity between Woodstock’s leadership and NAMB. So, people’s suspicion of that animosity turn out to be: 1) of general or widespread knowledge among Woodstock members; and 2) in part, at least, that animosity influenced the Report.
Now, what we don’t know is whether the GCRTF Report will actually be able to help transfer the aforementioned animosity to the actual operations of NAMB. We will have to wait and see.
For the record: the last comment about Woodstock members being “horrible” is flatly denied as being even remotely a part of my thinking. Of course, if you can cast me as an unloving demon you can feel justified in ignoring anything I say. That still does not change the facts and a lie, or misinformation, seldom forms the basis for health and growth in any organization.
PS–Being “unified” says nothing about being right. You might want to study German history in the 1930’s.
Matt2239,
I’ve re-read Jesse’s comments several times and I find no basis for your accusing him of “animosity.” He merely points out that he as a member of the church you’re going after in this thread does not know what basis your accusations towards its membership (including him) have. I think maybe you should cool down the rhetoric a bit.
Josh, you obviously did not read very carefully and you obviously have never had any contact with the leadership of Woodstock, so you obviously sound like a “clanging cymbal” to me.
I’ll repeat: I’ve never said anything about any member of Woodstock except to respond to what the “top” membership of Woodstock has said about anyone who might have a difference of opinion with him.
So, for your sake and others, Josh, I’ll say it again: “My post concerns the leadership of Woodstock and the comments and actions he put on “public” display. Johnny had a “personal and professional” agenda — at least in part — in regard to the GCRTF Report. Jesse admitted in his post the same.
You can choose to ignore it. That is your perogative. I am going to wait for a while to see if some accusations that have been made make it to the light of day. Then, we can continue the discussion as to what the “agenda” really is behind the GCRTF Report. We must “wait and see.”
If the accusations I have heard do not make it to the light of day in the next few weeks, then I am going to walk away from the matter.
As a sideline, Josh: what would happen if every church followed the giving pattens of Woodstock and example of Johnny Hunt? I’ll tell you what would happen in my church. CP giving would go down 50%. Annie Armstrong giving would go down 100%. Lottie Moon giving would go down over 75%.
Those are the “real numbers.” I’ll end this post and post another about “real numbers.”
Matt,
thank you for your response. I am “obviously” done discussing with you for the time being.
Guidestone announced changes in insurance coverage that are part of the new health care law. They still don’t cover some pastors with existing conditions -now. Time to play the “What If” game. I would pay my income tax, social security and medicare and have that confidence of income & medical care. Your wife is covered there also with separate benefits. “What If” the SBC doesn’t get the increases it desires? No wonder Richard Land doesn’t upport new health care laws when it will force insurance companies, perhaps Guidestone, to change it’s rules and provide insurance instead of hoarding money. “What If”.
Jack,
People don’t support Obamacare because it is socialized medicine which will lead to a lower standard of care for Americans. Anyone who wants a socialized system of medicine should move to a country that has one. I’ll be more than happy to help them pack.
Joe, I appreciate your offer to pack me but I would rather have you find healthcare for pastors that are turnred down for coverage by guidestone and I assume everybody else. Others that don’t want better healthcare are those with private plans that are solvent at this moment. Many that are using “Obamacare” as you put it have experienced their companies going bust with health or pensions eliminated. Pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies that game the system don’t want changes The poor don’t know what health care is about in Canada or wherever else you have in mind but what they don’t need is a helping hand leaving the country. Social Security & Medicare & medicaid if necessary will be available for them at 65 because they paid into it – a move some have not chosen to make. Mistake?
Sure, you will show me where it is my responsiblity to make sure those pastors have health care, yes? I lost my job, my wife lost her job, and we had no health insureance for us or our daughter while I was also working a bi-vo pastoral gig that offered no benefits (not a complaint–just an observation). So you know what I did? Since I wanted better for my family, I did this crazy thing called, gasp, going back to school and getting a better job. It’s called “Being.A.Responsible.Adult”.
Real Numbers and the Mega-church Movement.
Mega-churches like to use “numbers” when talking about their accomplishments. For example so and so church baptized 438 people last year. Wow! That’s impressive . . . or is it? Or so and so church gave $178,000 to Lottie Moon. That’s impressive . . . or is it?
Take the first number — a real number from the convention. That’s just over 6% of the congregations weekly attendance. That’s the equivalent of the “typical” SBC church baptizing 5 or 6. If you relate the number of baptisms to a percentage of the annual income of respective churches, the story gets even more interesting.
Take the second number and compare it to the total income of the church, or divide it by the membership of the church and you will see that such numbers are really nothing to brag about.
This is the primary thrust for at least some who were related to the GCRTF. Their percentages were embarrassing. Hence, let’s redefine giving to make us look better. That is at leas a part of the agenda–and I’ll agree it is not the whole picture, perhaps. But, it is something that should have played no part in such a divisive report.
Add this to the fact that no ballot was taken and the parlimentary protocol was less than stellar and it “stinks.” Some people can live with the smell, I can’t — at least not at the moment.
Sounds like Johnny Hunt has sucessfully completed another Business 101 in that it appears he can collect and dispense funds that excite his congregation where he wants while getting credit for giving under the cooperative program where only a few know where the green goes. There was an amendment at this point but I’m not sure it corrected this condition. Johnny Hunt is a smart man who I admire and if I had grown a mega-mega-church from nothing with hard work and leadership I would be reluctant to relinquish control of a huge amount of proceeds to some that need three (3) jobs to survive – and still might not have healthcare. Sorry.
I am not a great fan of the mega church movement nor of the GCR, although I did end up voting for it. But I don’t care what the number are, I am thankful 438 people are now saved. I am thankful that money was given.
I believe they could give more and should give more through the CP so all the ministries of the SBC could be funded. But we are coming dangerously close to ascribing sinful or less than holy motives to them. Disagree with them, but the GCR was thot up so that the mega churches could have a cover for the little they are giving through the CP.
(btw, I am a small church pastor whose church gives 25% of all our funds to the CP, association, Lottie, Annie, state missions and florida baptist children’s homes)
Matt2239 “So, for your sake and others, Josh, I’ll say it again: “My post concerns the leadership of Woodstock and the comments and actions he put on “public” display. Johnny had a “personal and professional” agenda — at least in part — in regard to the GCRTF Report. Jesse admitted in his post the same.”
What did I admit too? Perhaps you read into my post in a literal sense, but that was not my intention and I greatly appreciate my pastor, Johnny Hunt as well as all the church staff.
matt2239 “Woodstock members had an axe to grind ”
You say your thoughts are toward the FBCW staff members, but in this quote you state members. Therefore, you must be omniscient to know the hearts of all those who attend FBCW. Thankfully we answer to one Judge. One day you can stand in line behind the other accuser and point your finger and explain to God how bad the people and the staff are at FBCW.
Actually, Jesse I only refer to the “staff” I actually spoke with and communicated in writing. Again, you paint with a broad brush.
I’m glad you love and support your pastor, but if he has some things he needs to answer to, then I think he should be accountable — in regard to his public and published statements.
Remember, your pastor set himself and his church up as an example for others to follow, but when the numbers come out — as you will see from my post above — they do not match the rhetoric.
Please keep this in mind: Johnny Hunt invited this scrutiny himself. He opened a Pandora’s box that will affect the Convention significantly in the next months and few years. People will lose jobs based upon Johnny Hunt’s vision. I think that makes it a significant enough matter to at least discuss.
As with all your posts, you ignore the facts. I will accept your admonishment that I painted with too broad a brush in suggesting all members of Woodstock understand what goes on behind the scenes. I do not want to imply that. I should have said, “some members have an ax to grind, and many at the top leadership level.”
Perhaps it is not that I ignore facts, but yet I am like many ignorant to all of them. Honestly I only stumbled across this forum just to see how the SBC went. As a child of God I suppose I just want to be ignorant of some things because perhaps I am in the milk stage and do not carry the same burdens as an annointed man of God. My concern is at the simplest form and it is for those who are in need of the Lord. As a body of Christ is the hand being the hand and the foot being the foot. My part is to do my part only. God bless you in what he has called you to do.
I hope all of the struggles that are going on will be worked out and earnestly pray that the Holy Spirit will give guidance to all who are in need. I can only pray that I will abide in what the Lord calls me to do. I tithe not because any man ask me to tithe, but because God requires me and I am blessed abundantly so I am deeply honored to go above that. I support 1 missionary that is with Campus Crusade and not through FBCW because I feel that is what God wants me to do. I support two other missionaries in Asia. One has a fund set up at FBCW and the other is not and do that not because FBCW, but because I feel as if God wants me too direct His money to those needs. Perhaps I am wrong, but what I support is what I believe God has directed me to do and not by any man on earth despite what I may hear at the pulpit. I know those who I give the Lord’s money to barely have enough to make it through each month and yet I am grateful to share with those families.
Thank you for seeing that I took your post as a “broad brush.” I sincerely hope the Lord will bless you.
Thank you for accepting my apology. And please know that even though I have some lingering issues with those who stepped into the spotlight, I do not wish to see anyone come “tumbling down.”
Unity requires honesty and transparency. I think both may have been slightly lacking in the process. I am not in a position to do anything about what I “think,” I “might” know. So, I am only going to ride this horse a little further. If others who should know what I think I know, choose to hide it under the rug, I’m moving on.
I wish to follow your example of doing what God has asked me to do, regardless of what others may or may not be doing. Your testimony of proactive faith inspires me and I’m sure there are many, many like you at Woodstock. I pray God continues to bless you and the church.
The following link is my testimony on Google Docs
From there you can see why there is a need for pastorial leaders to do what they believe is right for the denomination, but it is another thing that people like me have a place assigned by God as a place of refuge from the world and mostly from my flesh. I am so grateful that FBCW was there when God gave me an opportunity to be forgiven. I believe I ended up at the right place and I am grateful to all those who have helped me get on the right track. I used to be the enemy of all of you and now I consider you a brother. Take a read if the link works (or copy and paste to your browswer) and you will know why.
https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B522OSw1BqRZOTQzYjg0YzctN2E3Ni00OTRmLWJjZjEtZjQ4NzQ4YTc5Mzg5&hl=en
Joe, I had already written another post before I saw your post 31. This might be in response to what you wrote there. I’m probably 40 years older or more than you and the same thing happened to mewith a large company going bankrupt taking everything with them including retirement. Not crying as you said but I had a son in University and I’ve got severe health problems. I didn’t take it sitting down. I’ve seen these scenerios unfold and listened to balogna spouted by Officials that were hollow. Going back to school was not an option for me but my son did go on to Seminary and has a fighting spirit that shows in the pulpit. I found relief in court and in Social Security and Medicare. I paid for it, am paying for it now and exist because it is there. Your too proud to ask for help and so am I ; but, the Bible does say somthing about helping people in need and that was you and I and many others. And our society doesn’t allow people to die in the gutter and then get scooped up by a trash truck. Peace
the Bible does say somthing about helping people in need
The Bible does not say anything about it being the governments responsiblitity to social healthcare and therefore trash the greatest healthcare system on the planet. The Bible does mandate that I help out–it does not mandate Obama sticking his filthy Kenyan paws in my pocket to take my money to help out.
I can volunteer to help you pack if you want. Remember there is a whole U.S. House of Representatives and Senate that created and passed what are improvements to the best healthcare in the world that was getting ripped off. I’m sure it will work out for you. Reasonable men may differ. Again , Peace
Remember, this is also the healthcare bill that is going to lead to legalized baby murders being financed with taxpayer money. That is why Christians didn’t suport it
Matt,
Would you mind emailing me the name(s) of the staff member(s) you spoke with about missions at Woodstock?
I’d love to follow up with them and you.
I’m more than happy to share my phone number with you via email so we could talk about your questions. Sometimes DBs like this one fail to convey things correctly, and when it comes to this type of discussion, it’s important that they do.
Much Love!
DW
Already been there, done that, have the T–Shirt. As I said, I’m going to wait to see if those who “should” clear up this issue bring it to light, with all the facts, cancelled checks, minutes of meetings, etc. As I’ve said, either the “powers to be” (which is not me) put up or shut up. If they don’t put up, then I’m through with the issue.
Adding you to that mix at this time would only engender more hard feelings and useless gossip.
Dallas,
Feel free to comment on the issue raised about how the President of the Convention can claim to support the SBC, but the church gave “0” to Annie Armstrong and only a token amount per attendee to Lottie Moon. Right now I don’t remember the CP amount, but feel free to add that to your response.
These are all a matter of public record and do not bode well for someone claiming to support the SBC. If you want to enlighten me as to that this one single issue, that would be a good place to start the dialogue. Jumping into the middle of an issue that has been going on for well over 2 years, does not seem to be a good place to jump in.
Dallas, thank you for your gracious spirit, and that demonstrated by Dr. Hunt as he moderated the meeting. I did not agree with everything he said or did, but his spirit was Christ-like at all times as he led the convention.
I am sorry you have been treated as you have been on the comment stream of a post I have wrote.
“:Les Puryear has put up a website with 150 or so signatories which has laid claim to the SBC Majority mantle. The majority of Southern Baptist churches average fewer than 200 in attendance. This, according to Puryear, is the majority. But a recent study published at “Between the Times” showed that 70% of Southern Baptists attend larger churches. It seems that a majority of churches are smaller, but the majority of Baptists chose larger churches. So, who is the real majority?”
Maybe the convention should use the Electoral College method. Each church gets a vote on each issue whether there or not. Time to get technology in the mix.
Richard Land is huge. Very large and he can be thankful that it is now against the law for his health insurance provider to refuse to cover him. If it’s Guidestone then Southern Batists are indirectly providing that insurance. And Guidestone tried to claim improvements in their Health programs in their presentation that are now required by law. They had to change. Oh Well!
Jack, that was kind of unkind wasn’t it? I saw Richard Land and he could certainly lose a few pounds. But your description of him is not entirely fair.
Dave, I appreciate your type of response instead of I should leave the country. Richard Lands ELRC allows him to play ‘hardball” with others. His position against many things as an SBC official lets him speak for me somewhat and I think I’m as correct as I guess he does. One of those items was the recent hate crime bill that had protections for pastors and teachers and he wouldn’t change his position. Nothing but Capitol Hill politics and buffets at every hotel in the evening. I’ve seen him dish it out so I know he can take it and it’s very apparent he needs no one to defend him in any arena. That’s the way I am and I’ll blame some of it on the “directness” of New England humor. If his feelings are hurt I’ll make him feel better.in person, on-line , whatever. I have room for criticism and I know my skin is tough enough to take it. Whether we like it or not, sometimes the truth hurts. Lungs are my problem, self induced. Weight is one of his which could trigger diabetes, heart etc. Medicine can do a lot if we allow it and follow the rules. This I know. I’m sorry it bothered you but I saw on the internet the promise that more people are going to speak their mind. Hopfully our new president will change some things which will allow more people whoever they are and from whatever background to speak without reservation no matter what. Thank you for taking me to task.
This was my second SBC and the first time I ever voted as a messenger. It would seem prudent to join the 21st century with respect to technology by allowing some sort of electronic vote. Personally, I’m not comfortable handing my ballot to the person on my right to be navigated to a ballot collector. I seem to remember disenfranchisement being an issue in Florida once before. Today’s technology would expedite the process.
I think people are basically honest at the SBC, Byron. I am personally opposed to electronic balloting for several reasons. First, there is a much greater chance for skullduggery. What’s to stop me from signing up 10 messengers and voting all ten times?
As I read comments, I realized that watching the SBC on computer gives a much different impression than being in the room. I think that perspective matters.
On a personal note, the best part of the convention was the fellowship. That is completely lost in computer balloting.
Just don’t like the idea. Hope we can survive the next 30 years or so without it.
Thank you for your comments Dave. I definitely agree with you that the fellowship was priceless. I am a student of LRU online and have been able to attend the luncheon for the past two years, greatly benefiting my perspective of the school and faculty. I have been so blessed by the Lord to have been led to LRU.
Blessings to all.
I actually think we may have crossed paths at the convention. I remember seeing a “Van Arsdale” name tag. Knew a guy in college with that name (Artie). I remember it registering in my mind when I saw it.
Mr. Miller writes: “Will we embrace the vision the Task Force has put forward or will we turn back and hold onto the status quo?”
I have personally tried to put myself in the stance of forwarding the Great Commission most of my life. I have always thought the SBC, though not perfect, was always on mission to forward the Great Commission. The Task Force isn’t going to forward SBC to be more on mission for Christ. The vote to accept the GCR, may very well have weaken the giver (we shall see), set in motion selective giving for what we like (not always our choice to like or dislike), the Cooperative giving (covered a broad scope of ministries, that was engaged in carrying out the Divine Mandate. (will this vote now passed) have a direct impact (for the better) in carrying out the Great Commission? (we shall see, if the giver steps up to the plate and gives more to the cooperative program through the local church) . I suspect (and I truly hope I’m dead wrong in my suspect) that well see a continuation of giving, but a sharp reduction of staff folks(across the conventions) doing ministries where they live. Streamlining ministries to folks(not living in the area). I wonder how great that will be? Jesus said go everywhere! What part of everywhere is selective? I continue to pray for unity! We are so diverse in our thinking, nothing wrong with that, as long as we keep focused on Jesus. May God Bless Us to stand tall and carry out the Great Commission for His glory. Each one giving their best, and together moving cooperatively as a SBC faith group in His power. I never sensed we were standing still, or in status guo in carrying out the Great Commission. Many many times in the scriptures Jesus said to the disciples: “You just don’t get it Have I not said this and that…” I suspect, for the most part, we don’t get it. What say ye….!