12 Witnesses

I’ve been listening to Third Day - Wire in my truck and the song, “It’s a Shame” was playing. As I listened to the lyrics, I found the words so fit my feelings toward the SBC and its propensity to tear itself apart. Here are the lyrics, and you can buy the cd at Lifeway, of course…

I hate to be, to be the one
Who’s given up
And feels that all our hope is gone
But what I thought was a miracle
Just turned into the same old
Problem that it was
She longs for better days
She’s always been afraid
It’s a shame, oh it’s a shame
That you are throwing your whole life away
It’s a shame, oh it’s a shame
I wonder if you’re ever going to change
It’s a shame
Ever since I can recall
She has been so afraid
Of you losing it all
What do you want
Do you even know
And is it worth the pain
We all have to endure
She longs for better days
She’s always been afraid
You left her without leaving
You hit her without swinging
You took away without giving a thing
Except for pain and sorrow
I’m praying that tomorrow
You will open up your eyes and see

I’m no Mac Powell. Who could say it better?

A few days ago I posted the story “Shock & Awe” which centered around the practical fallout of the IMB BOT policies newly in place. As a matter of integrity, I need to make a correction within the story.

I had told about a local veterinarian, who is also a deacon and trustee of our church. I mentioned that, under the new policies, he would be ineligible to serve as an IMB missionary. He grew up in an Assemblies of God church, but has been a member of ours, with his family, for more than a decade, now. After talking with his wife, I learned that he was baptized as a believer in a baptist church and not in the AG church, after all.

The hard truth remains, though, that while my friend would be eligible, many qualified Southern Baptists are not eligible under these new policies. This is a major concern for us. We must address it.

Don’t leave! You are still at my blog. I have changed the name of the blog from theoblogian today. Why? Well, among other things, theoblogian today sounded kind of… goofy. Presumptious, maybe? I don’t know.

Truth is, I thought it was clever. It was, too. However, clever is not what I am going for, anymore.

12 Witnesses

So why 12 Witnesses? Well, 12 stones was taken. No kidding. By someone who doesn’t even care or blog much either. Oh well.

Why 12 stones? Oh, in reference to the numerous times that people in the Old Testament would make a monument out of twelve stones, one for every tribe of Israel, and leave that as a rememberence of a commitment they made to the Lord.

I have made a commitment, recently, and I want the things that I write here to be a witness to what I say and do in the future to live up to that commitment.

I am committed to reaching the lost generations of 20, 30 and 40 somethings. We are losing them and because we are losing them, we are losing their children. This must stop.

I am committed to standing against bad theology and bad behavior within the SBC. This may cost me some discomfort, though I doubt it will hurt much. Still, whatever the price, it is worth it.

I am reading and growing like crazy, right now. I have more to tell you, so check back.

Concerning recent activity within the SBC, the IMB and its Board of Trustees, I have spoken with several former pastors who are my seniors in both age and, at times, in supervision in ministry. In other words, some of them were my boss at one point or another. These have been among the most frustrating conversations I have ever had - including some pointless arguments in Seminary.

My problem? They do not pay any attention to the SBC any more. One chooses to focus on his church and its needs right now. This sounds noble until you add that he was constantly steering the conversation to insignificant issues in his personal life - y’know, small talk. So it wasn’t that he had tremendous weight of important local ministry on his mind - that never came up.

Another conversation was met with the constant reference to how Baptists are so bad about beating each other up. I was asked if I had read a book documenting all the controversies and the mean things we had done to each other over the years. The overall reaction? This is just the next issue to beat each other up over, since that is what we do. While I agree that we need not to be mean spirited and ungodly toward each other - that is a major issue for me - I do not agree that we should just ignore the fight. This attitude implies that the people involved just fight because that is what they do and if we are involved in the fight it is because we are fighters (read: we lack the peace part of the Christian character) and not because we think a part of the issue is worth the fight.

So how do we convince those older than us, those who have seen some tough fights in the SBC, that they need to be active in this one? By the nature of their relationship to us, they think we are not as experienced and astute as they are. How can we go up the ladder with this message?

First I think we need to be humble. If we come across as thinking we know more, they will ignore our message because of our arrogance. The truth is they probably have seen and done more than we have in the area of denominational principles. We must give them that respect and I think it gives them a reason to listen to our concerns.

Second, I think we point them to the blogs. They are a consistent record of what has been said, so there is no hearsay or degradation of the message. If they are not ‘net savvy, then print out the salient stuff and give it to them on paper. Not too much, either. If you hand them the stacks that it would take to put all that has been written recently, it will go unread. No more than 5 - 10 pagers, I think. Also, after that, you might throw in the papers by Drs. Patterson and Eitel hosted on sbc outpost. The relevance of Eitel’s paper might need to be explained, but Patterson’s is obviously relevant to the new policies of the IMB.

Third, I think we need to be patiently consistent. I think numerous small conversations will do more than one big “We need to save the SBC from annihilation!” conversation. They do have a lot on their minds and the relevance of this situation may not be readily grasped.

What do you think? How are we going to go up the ladder?

Last night I was supposed to be teaching Bible Study (through the book of Galatians) for Small Group Time with our church’s Youth Group. I had been blogging all afternoon and the IMB/SBC issue was on my mind. On top of that, I was blown away by some papers that had been made available on Marty Duren’s site, SBC outpost.

As people began to arrive at our youth facility, I huddled with two adults and we began to discuss what was happening. Like most congregation members, they were unaware of the general politics of the SBC and not that concerned.

Keep in mind, at this point, that our church gives 15% (20% until a couple of years ago) of our offerings to the Cooperative Program - a major supporter of CP in the state and one of the highest per capita givers also. The tithes of these two adults are going to support the CP and as we talked, they paid polite attention.

At first, it appeared to be a theological nuance kind of thing, in their estimation. Something that I would care about, but nothing that they should have at the front of their mind. As we moved to start our small group - the whole youth group was gathered - our previous conversation spilled over to the teenagers. They were generally interested and asked some questions, so I answered and allowed the topic to stay where it was, bumping the scheduled lesson to next week.

It all turned to Shock & Awe when I explained the fallout of the new policies adopted by the trustees of the IMB.

One of our former Youth Workers, and a parent of two in our group, is a local veterinarian, deacon and trustee for our church and the chair of our church’s Mission Committee. This is a committee that he envisioned and its responsibility is to organize and implement mission projects and mission trips for our church. I told them that this young leader in our church would be ineligible to go as a missionary under these new guidelines. The good Doctor is unacceptable because, although he is a conservative believer who was baptized as a believer, he was baptized in an Assemblies of God church. His children’s faces were ashen and the room felt heavy.

I reaffirmed him to the group, assuring them that he believes that he cannot lose his salvation (neither does he speak in tongues - publicly or privately) and that his faith was sound. The disillusionment was palpable, however. His daughter then asked the $10 million question: “My dad is supposed to go on the Nicaragua Mission Trip this summer. Does this mean he can’t go?”

I sighed a big sigh and said, “Don’t worry. Fortunately, the IMB is not in authority over that trip. He can go and no one can stop him.”

We answered a few more pertinent questions dealing with things like what would happen to the missionaries on the field and what is motivating these kinds of policies to be implemented.

Still, the dull thud of a horrible truth echoes here. If the IMB excludes us, we go outside the IMB, and outside the SBC, just like my friend will be doing this summer. The bell tolling in the background is a call to prayer for the future of the greatest missionary sending body of the New Testament age: the SBC. Either that, or it is the Death Knell. It’s up to us to decide which it will be.

After the meeting, one of the adults asked about the other staff in our church - what they know and what they think. Now they want to know what we are going to do about this. I take this as a good sign.

My greatest concern for the SBC is the generation gap that is resulting in the abandonment of the SBC by young leaders who feel they are misunderstood, disrespected and ignored by those now leading the SBC. Mostly my friends and I are frustrated by the feeling that we are being taken for granted, i.e. we are there to do what we are told by our seniors and to do it the “right” way (read: “their” way).

Over the last few years the SBC has attempted to reach out to this generation of disconnected leaders and stop the hemorrhaging. While I appreciate the sentiment and the understanding of the older generation and their desire to make changes, I still don’t think they see the reality of OUR PERSPECTIVES – that is the way we are viewing them and the convention in general.

As evidence of that, I found an article by Dr. Jimmy Draper on the SBC Young Leader blog. In it he defends the SBC as a valid entity for future ministry. While I agree that we are valid and our future can be bright, the recent actions by the Board of Trustees of the IMB, and a certain caucus within the board, have stood the entire process of young leader retention on its head. We are now feeling more and more disenfranchised by cronyism and generational distance – as evidenced by the older (mean age=50’s, with several in their 70’s) trustees who equate Wade Burleson’s blog with “internet porn.”

By way of humble rebuttal (I am not attacking or defying Jimmy Draper in any way) I offer this critique of his article, “Can Any Good Come From the SBC?” which you can read in its entirety here. I am merely offering up a perspective that I believe the older generation needs to hear from us. Well, it needs to hear it from me, anyway.

Italics are from Dr. Draper, the rest from me.

1. The SBC foundationally has a vision for mission and evangelism. But that vision is now being subverted by Landmark theologians that are meeting against IMB Board of Trustees policies and controlling the Board of Trustees with misinformation and backroom deals as well as undercutting Dr. Rankin, IMB President. Moreover, control of message minutia seems more important than reaching people with essentials of the message.

2. There is strength in our cooperative efforts. We can do more together than we can by ourselves. Boy, do I agree with this. As a matter of fact, it has been my personal cry to the churches of my association, of which my church is one of the largest and THE church with the most resources. It has been the rallying cry for association mission trips that have been broad in base and fruitful with souls won. The problem is that we don’t think you want to cooperate with us. We think you want us to do as we’re told and you might hand the denomination off to us when you die, but only if we promise to do with it what you want us to THE WAY YOU WANT IT DONE. This is evidenced by the general age of the trustees of all of our agencies and by the length of their uninterrupted service. If you want us involved, give us roles of leadership.

3. Southern Baptists have a heart for soul-winning. Sure, and I resonate with that. Again, though, it seems to me that this may be taking second place to the way the soul is won, whether or not they are baptized “correctly” - that is BEYOND Scriptural believer’s baptism - and who wins them.

4. We love church planting. Yes, but you are missing the fact that many of our young leaders are starting churches independently to avoid the convention politics that so turns our stomachs.

5. We have a clearly defined doctrinal base. Oh, wow. Yeah. But right now the new requirements of the IMB go well beyond the BFM - 2000 (or any other of our confessions, historically).

6. Southern Baptists celebrate the autonomy of the local church. OK, I just don’t know that you mean this. The convention has been a “from the top down” organization since 1979. Now, obviously we are not told how to act or what to believe, locally. We are, however, threatened with being expelled for stepping “out of line.” Now, don’t get me wrong here. I think we need to be on the same page to work together, but the sincerity of this statement rings somewhat hollow.

7. We have developed the most effective theological training anywhere in the world through our seminaries with more than 15,000 students enrolled this year. Yes. And again, many are planning to use their education in an independent setting to avoid the convention’s politics.

8. Southern Baptists have expressed leadership in addressing the relevant cultural issues of our day to the point where our perspective is now being sought both in our nation and around the world. Sought by who? Many non-Christians that I hear say that we come across as completely disconnected to the culture of today. I’m not saying that we should “tickle their ears,” but the way we say what we say makes us look old and stodgy, and they disregard what we say as irrelevant.

9. Resources such as Experiencing God, Beth Moore Bible studies and True Love Waits have had a significant global impact in cultures worldwide and beyond our denomination. If we are leaning on these three products, and their use by other denominations, as evidence of why YOUNG LEADERS should stay with the convention, we are in trouble. Experiencing God is well past its expiration date and the statistics about the impact of True Love Waits suggest that participants wait marginally longer to have premarital intercourse and, in the meantime, resort to oral sex because they believe it is “not sex.” How relevant do these things make us?
…
Is the SBC a lost cause? ABSOLUTELY NOT! Remember, the story we are sharing with the world is one of grace, redemption, restoration and usefulness. Those elements apply as well to organizations such as the SBC. Let’s extend grace to each other and stay on point to be used of God. If we will, I believe that not only will good come from the SBC, but that the BEST is yet to come.

Dr. Draper, I love you and I am thrilled by your optimism. Moreover, I think that your vision expressed here is very possible. Still, the SBC is going to have to let us lead or the convention will go the way of many of our churches. That is to say, the senior adults make the church comfortable for themselves until all the young people go start a new organization that does church the way they see fit.

I have been following with grave concern the events that have taken place over the last couple of weeks in regards to the International Mission Board (IMB). Last week, the trustees voted to ask the SBC to expel from their midst a member of their board. From all accounts, this is a thing never to have happened before.

The controversy surrounds his disagreement with some in the board over new policies implemented governing the appointment of new missionaries. I give you a link to his blog here, and you can review his position and get more information.

My blog will not detail his struggle, as he can do it far better than I. I want to address the future of the SBC. I am a younger pastor (30’s) and have been a SB all of my life. My family has SB heritage through uncles, cousins and grandparents. We are all SB, and about half are in ministry.

This is not why the SBC is important to me, though. The SBC holds my attention and participation for two reasons. The first is that my beliefs are well represented and I am free to practice my faith as a Biblical evangelical. In other words, I have a community of like faith. The second reason is an extension of the first. I join with this community, and those who were before us, to reach out across the world to share the Gospel with others, creating the greatest missionary sending body of the New Testament era, in my opinion.

I don’t want to lose this platform for evangelism. I am afraid that we may have already lost it.

The fallout from the decision to restrict our missionaries beyond the Scripture and even beyond the Baptist Faith and Message is going to be that the leadership of the Convention will so narrow the mindset of our missionaries - and later our churches and seminaries - into an acute reflection of themselves that the rest of us will simply leave. This will make the SBC both uniform and small.

A comment left on Wade Burleson’s blog is from a Missionary living in the 1040 window is profound and I want to reprint it here for your perousal. (The 1040 window is an area between 10 and 40 degrees north latitude and is one of the spiritually darkest areas on the earth. Our missionaries often live undercover there so the are not expelled or even killed. Here is a link to a better explaination.)

This is but the beginning of problems if we look down stream.The compounded problem?

The Board of Trustees indicated that the new policy regarding
‘prayer language’ and ‘baptism’ would not be retroactive or applied to the current IMB mission force. I do not believe this will be the case. Furthermore, I would say that the actions taken could possibly bring missions work to a halt as we know it. Here’s is why:

1. If new personnel with ‘authorized’ baptism pedigrees serve with those who are not, then there will be a mixed mission force. This mixture will become a point of contention and division (or even inquiry as to who is ‘authorized’). If missionary A is a Landmarkist and missionary B is not (and his/her baptism is considered invalid) then missionary A will have a problem with the fruit of missionary B, or even of working with missionary B. This will necessitate a clarification of who has authority to do missions. It will put new ‘authorized’ personnel in charge of validating current and future work, as well as, all past work.

2. But how could this bring missions as we know it to a halt - by shutting down all the intricate, interdependent, cooperative relationships the IMB has developed with Great Commission Christians (GCC). The challenge is so huge, the people so hungry, the darkness so great in many places that our leadership has rightly said, ‘This is a challenge for the whole Body of Christ, and those who are of like mind should work together.” Is the Bible Translator from an authorized Church? Is his baptism of the authorized type? Is the person we partner with in street evangelism and discipleship ‘authorized?”

In the context of Unreached People Groups (UPG’s) in the 1040 window (most of whom are restricted or limited access nations – where you cannot work openly as a missionary) house churches are the only real means of developing church and working towards indigenous church planting movements. The new “baptism” policy would invalid those house churches. This new policy would cause everything to grind to a halt - no CPM’s, the IMB’s current strategy for reaching the UPG’s of the world. I would say that those who put forward the motions along with many of those who supported it (I don’t say all, because there may be some who might not understand the full ramifications of their decision) are not pleased with the New Directions strategy instigated and implemented by Dr. Rankin. Maybe they are after Dr. Rankin AND the strategy.

3. The outcry may come too late - but it will come if Landmarkism overshadows IMB personnel and strategies and the Annual Statistical Report drops off the map because of destroyed relationships with GCC’s and an invalidation of all “unauthorized” baptizers. Yes, then there will be shouts, but will there be any ears left to hear them?

Living in the 1040
January 20, 2006

We must step forward and rescue the SBC from isolationism that forces conformity beyond essential, Biblical standards.

I believe what I heard Dr. Jack McGorman say in class at Southwestern Seminary one day. He said that many on both sides were at “war” with each other because they held more power during wartime than during peace. As long as their is a foe to press out of the SBC, they have something to gain, personally. Yes, this is sinful, but I don’t know that they all may recognize it as such. For this they have my sympathy, but that will not weaken my resolve to remove them from a postition where they are able to do what they are now doing.

For many, this fight, and my presence in it is too late. They may be right. If this press back by conservatives is unsuccessful, I see most of my generation moving away from the SBC - effectively dismantling what I called earlier, “the greatest missionary sending body in the New Testament era.”

We will be left with one of two options:

1. We will have to replace the SBC by forming yet another orginization of cooperation, and wade through the power sturuggles that come with it. This is not a bright prospect for me.

2. We will have to become independant churches who send missionaries out from our own congregations to places all over the world, as the moravians used to do. This will deny us the resources that cooperation afforded us so well.

The latter option is also filled with irony. It will leave the Southern Baptist Convention in the hands of Landmark theologians, who have traditionally eschewed and criticized denominationalism while isolating individuals who prefer the broad company of conservative Christians with whom to cooperate in accomplishing the mission.

*sigh* We must pray. We must also act.