Here are two things on which to chew this weekend:
Remember the Young Leaders Conference 2, War Memorial Auditorium, Monday, June 12, 9:30 pm Eastern.
I have talked with Marty and he tells me that the line up of speakers is coming together beyond what any of us had hoped. I have to say that I am very excited about being in Greensboro this year. It will be a big year for the SBC and I think that is good. Once again, YSBC, if you want the current leadership to take you seriously, take the SBC seriously and be there for this conference.
Also, Bill Dodson has released a statement to the press stating that he will nominate Wiley Drake for 2nd VP of the SBC this year. Some of you may know that Bill did this last year, with no pre-event publicity and Wiley received 21% of the vote. Wiley is well known to many who have attended the SBC as “Mr. Resolution.” Read the rest of the press release and you will know why.
Before you do, however, let me tell you briefly about Bill Dodson and why his nomination matters. Bill is a conservative that has pastored four churches over the span of fifty years. In each of the churches, before he left, the Sunday School attendance was over 1,000. Bill is a soul winner and his churches have reflected that.
He is among those who fought for the authority of the Bible alongside Adrian Rogers, Homer Lindsey and others. He told me that when Adrian passed, he thought, “Oh, no. I’m the last pea in that pod.” He will turn 80 this year, but is still vital, visiting members of his church in the hospital regularly, even though he is now retired. This will be his 62nd straight convention. Of course, I am leaving out all of the denominational posts in which he has served, because they are too numerous to mention. The great thing about his service is that he never sought it, but humbly served when asked.
When Bill steps to the microphone to nominate Wiley this year, I hope that everyone gives him a rousing ovation for the work he has done and still does for the Lord. He is a treasure in the SBC.
Having said that, here is the release:
February 24, 2006MURRAY, Ky. Wiley Drake, pastor of the First Southern Baptist Church of Buena Park, California, will be nominated for second vice president of the Southern Baptist Convention at the 2006 annual meeting in Greensboro, NC, June 13-14. Bill Dodson of Murray, KY, will make the nomination.”Over the past fifty years that I’ve been attending Southern Baptist Conventions, I don’t think I’ve ever met a Southern Baptist anymore committed to our conservative values than Wiley Drake. He has the kind of guts that Southern Baptists have always loved in their leaders, and I think it’s time we recognize that Wiley really does represent a segment of Southern Baptists,” Dodson said.For many years, Southern Baptist messengers have heard from Wiley Drake, who is often seen hovering around a microphone in the convention hall, ready with a string of motions and resolutions to call Southern Baptists to take a stand on moral concerns like abortion and homosexuality.”The only disadvantage of having Wiley Drake as second vice president is that we won’t get to see him on the convention floor. But maybe some folks will think that’s an advantage. Either way, I’ve grown to love Wiley and appreciate his consistency, integrity and wit,” Dodson noted.Little doubt exists that Wiley Drake is one of Southern Baptists’ more colorful figures. A native Southerner who pastors a church in the Los Angeles area, Drake has taken heat in his community for promoting biblical values. But the man some have come to know as “Mr. Resolution,” has a great heart for missions and personal soul winning.In recent years, Drake has been cited and put in jail for violating city ordinances against sheltering the homeless without a permit. Insisting that the State of California could not prohibit a local church from fulfilling its mission, Drake persisted in providing shelter for the homeless on his church property, an act that would ultimately get him a probated sentence and 1500 hours of community service. Undeterred, Drake fulfilled his sentence of community service, something he said he had been doing as the church’s pastor all along.”Wiley has a great blend of heart for social concerns-not just the big issue items that conservatives talk about all the time, but concerns for the poor and for justice-and he’s got a keen eye for doctrine and fidelity to our Baptist Faith & Message,” Dodson explained. “I just think it’s time that we recognize Wiley Drake in this way. We all love him. He’s one of us, and I think he’ll serve our convention commendably.”
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
Ben Stratton
on Feb 24th, 2006
@ 7:28 pm:
Bro. Bill Dodson is a good friend and a sound Baptist. In one sense he is the B.H. Carroll of western Kentucky. In an age when so many Baptist pastors have compromised their doctrinal beliefs, Bro. Dodson still stands for the old paths. While I don’t know much about Bro. Drake, if Bro. Dodson recommends him, he will get my vote.
art rogers
on Feb 24th, 2006
@ 8:34 pm:
Ben,
What do you mean when you say so many Baptist pastors have compromised their doctrinal beliefs?
By that, are you intimating that they are not Landmarkers? Because, while Landmarkism is certainly a part of Baptist history, it is not the only stream that feeds the river of who we are.
Moreover, your statement indicates that they are compromising their own doctrinal beliefs – beliefs that they themselves have held but then allowed to slip away for some illegitimate gain. If this is what you mean, then you should specify the doctrines compromised.
If this is not what you mean, then you should clarify. I consider this to be a very potentially demeaning statement pointed at YSBC, and I hope I am wrong.
art rogers
on Feb 24th, 2006
@ 8:45 pm:
I should clarify the reference to Landmarkism to our readers:
Ben has ben posting pro Landmark statements on other blogs (Wade’s in particular) and is using some language in the above post that seem to intimate Landmark issues, ie. he calls Bill the BH Carroll of W.KY (on Wade’s blog Ben said that Carroll was a Landmarker); he claims that some are compromising doctrinal beliefs (Landmarkers believe that Baptists descend through a chain of authority from Jesus’ establishment of the church until now – so to not be Landmark, in their mind, is to turn your back on “sound doctrine”) and that Bill stands for the “old paths” a phrase that harkens to their theme verse and their theology.
As to whether or not Bill is a Landmarker, I have never asked him, but from our conversations, I would be surprised. Nevertheless, I can work alongside any Landmark Baptist, but not many that I know really want to work alongside anyone else.
Also, not matter what Bill Dodson thinks about Landmarkism, what I said about him stands true. He is an SBC treasure.
Ben Stratton
on Feb 24th, 2006
@ 9:11 pm:
Bro. Rogers,
Good to hear from a Logan County Baptist. I was born there and my grandparents still live there. I grew up attending the Green Ridge Baptist Church and surrendered to preach there under the ministry of Bro. Chris Butler. My parents still attend another church in your association where my father serves as a deacon.
You asked what I meant when I said, “so many Baptist pastors have compromised their doctrinal beliefs”. I probably should I worded this better. What I meant was there is a major difference between what Southern Baptist preachers in 2006 believe and what Southern Baptist preachers in 1906 believed. This difference is also evident in Baptist churches as well. For example, take western Kentucky. There was a time not too long ago when you couldn’t find a single church west of Bowling Green that received alien immersion or practiced open communion. (These are not the only differences I am referring to) One of my heroes of the faith, H. Boyce Taylor, was ordained in the First Baptist Church of Russellville back in the 1890′s while his father, who was also a strict Baptist, was pastoring the church. What changed the beliefs and practices of our area? Pastors came into churches and changed the churches.
art rogers
on Feb 24th, 2006
@ 9:34 pm:
Ben,
I know Green Ridge church. I serve at the First Baptist Church you mention. It is true that many of our area churches have some Landmark tendencies to this day. North Logan and Todd Counties and Muhlenberg counties are more so.
You are right in some ways and wrong in some ways concerning our areas history. It certainly has been a root system for Landmark theology. Most know that Pendleton was a Bowling Green pastor, and some may know that he was ordained in Hopkinsville, KY. His influence here has been great.
Still, it has been more than a recent development that we have open communion and have gone away from “qualified administrator baptism.” Not long ago, one of my friends baptized his daughter in our church. He did so with the blessing of the church and staff. It was one of the most meaningful baptisms I had ever witnessed, and I have seen a few.
Still, though Landmarkism was certainly more widespread in 1906 among Baptists – none should deny this – church history would indicate that its development was pretty recent at that time, at least in comparison to most other theology.
Also, although our region held the Landmark impression longer than others, ideed still bears that mark to some degree and you are proof of it, it was not the norm over the 20th century for Baptists in America.
Nevertheless, thank you for reading and posting. I especially thank you for clarifying.
Tim Sweatman
on Feb 24th, 2006
@ 11:59 pm:
Ben,
Perhaps the reason that the beliefs of so many Baptists regarding “alien immersion” (I really don’t like that term) and closed communion have changed over the past 100 years is that we are trying to base our doctrinal views and our practices on the clear teaching of Scripture and not on Baptist tradition.
Ben Stratton
on Feb 25th, 2006
@ 5:53 am:
Bro. Rogers,
Good to hear back from you. I have never understood why some make a theological distinsticion between north Logan / Todd counties and south Logan / Todd counties. Some of the strongest Landmark Southern Baptist preachers I know are pastoring in churches in the bounds of the old Bethel association.
I’m think my contention that there was a time not too long ago when you couldn’t find a single church west of Bowling Green that received alien immersion or practiced open communion is correction. While I don’t know the personal history of your church, I would guess FBC of Russellville moved from close to open communion probably sometime around 1955 and moved to any open baptism policy (I’m talking about receiving alien (non-Baptist) immersion) probably around 1985. Those numbers may be off a little, but I’d say they are pretty close.
Also, one of the reasons for my website is to show that Landmark doctrines existed before J.R. Graves and J.M. Pendleton’s day and were once very mainstream among Southern Baptists.
Just trying to clarify for you.
art rogers
on Feb 25th, 2006
@ 8:10 am:
Ben,
I thank you again for your clarification and I ask what the heck you are doing blogging at 5 something Saturday morning?
The distinction between North Logan/Todd counties is just a regional distinctive. They border Muhlenberg Co. and that is a strong Landmark territory – no doubt. I question your assertion that there is much Landmark in what was the Bethel Association. Logan Association broke with Bethel(Logan the more northerly Association and Bethel in the south of the two counties) over such issues. We have just rejoined the two associations last year. The objections to the merger came from some of the northern churches. I know one Landmark pastor quit his church because of the merger – apparently not willing to be associated with all of the non-Landmark churches in the South.
As to your assertion that there are strong Landmark pastors in the south parts of these two counties, I can say I know of only one, myself. I called another minister in the area last night, who grew up here, and he verified what I was thinking.
I am sorry, but the assertion that there was NO Baptist church in Western Kentucky that was not Landmark is a long stretch, and I must point out is a matter of your opinion as there is no other way to verify such a thing.
As to theology other than Landmark moving in to Western Kentucky, I have two comments.
First, I would say that such a thing is not really “pastors compromising their doctrinal beliefs” so much as it is pastors moving congregations toward a new belief in different doctrine. I must note here that I am strongly against Landmarkism and I am trying to phrase my points here in a way that are not demeaning to you, my brother in Christ.
Secondly, I would further say that the Landmark doctrines traveled in much the same way. Pendleton, our local Landmarker in the “Triumvirate” was born in Virginia and moved to Christian County as a small child. He pastored in Bethel, Hopkinsville and Bowling Green, but then took the Landmark doctrine with him to Murfreesboro, while teaching at Union and as a pastor there, and then on to Ohio and Pennsylvania.
Frankly, the assertion that the Landmark theology predates the “Triumvirate” of Pendelton, Graves and Dayton is a stretch. There may have been threads of thought, but these three wove it and spread it.
All of this, of course, is a matter of history and perspective. I submit that because of the Landmark need for succession all the way back to Jesus’ establishment of the church, your perspective is that all Baptist churches were Landmark, and now we have “false doctrine” moving us away from Landmarkism. Honestly, I think that position is skewed. I am more than willing to give Landmarkism its proper place in Baptist history, but not more than its place.
Moreover, I am certainly not willing to give it any place in my theology. This qualifies me, according to your words, as one of compromised doctrinal beliefs. Those are your standards and I bear that no ill will. I, in the most repectful way possible, submit that I feel the same way about Landmark beliefs.
So, we simply find ourselves on the other side of the fence from one another as to this perspective.
In summary, I think you overstate Landmarkism’s influence and who are its supporters. That is a matter of my opinion and perspective.
art rogers
on Feb 25th, 2006
@ 8:15 am:
I should have said,
*I think you overstate Landmarkisms CURRENT influence and supporters*
JUSTAMOE
on Feb 25th, 2006
@ 11:40 am:
Sounds to me like Graves, et al, needed to get out of the county more often.
The majority didn’t, and the majority doesn’t, agree with the totality of Landmark theology–and for good reason: it isn’t entirely biblical, or accurate historically, or even good sense.
Ben Stratton
on Feb 25th, 2006
@ 7:57 pm:
Bro. Rogers,
Good to hear back from you. I personally know of three pastors in former Bethel Associations churches that are solidly landmark. I suspect there are several others that hold to some tenets of Landmarkism, especially the rejection of alien immersion. I’m not sure who you are talking about when you refer to the Landmark pastor who quit his church over the merger. There were three pastors in Logan Association churches that were the main ones against the merger and each of these men is still pastoring the same church. My parent’s former pastor, Bro. Calvin Bon at New Cedar Grove Baptist Church was a solid landmarker, but his resignation had nothing to do with the merger. One thing you have to remember is the use of the term “Landmarker”. There are many Southern Baptist pastors in Kentucky who hold to various tenets of Landmarkism, but have never heard that particular term.
You didn’t comment on my assessment of FBC, Russellville. Were my dates very far off?
As to pre-Pendleton landmarkism, I would point you to Leroy Hogues’ doctoral dissertation “Antecedents of Landmarkism”. Hogue wrote this work for Southwestern Baptist Seminary back in the 1950′s. In the work, he looks mainly at the states of Tennessee, Virginia, and Georgia and determines that each of the tenets of Landmarkism existed there and was even widespread before 1850. It’s a very enlightening work.
art rogers
on Feb 25th, 2006
@ 8:36 pm:
Ben,
Three pastors out of the old Bethel churches is a very small percentage.
I can’t say as to the dates, specifically, as I was not raised here. When I arrived, ten years ago, these issues were LONG gone for our church. I will ask around, but I do think you put very late dates on the issues. Because I couldn’t say with certainty, I didn’t comment as to the dates, because i couldn’t say off the top of my head, but since you asked…
As to the threads of Landmark theology, I remain firm in saying that some thoughts may have existed, but landmark theology was solidified and promoted by Graves, Dayton and Pendleton. This is a matter of historical fact far outweighed by a paper written for SWBTS by any author.
In short, I simply state that your representation of a widespread, broadly accepted Landmark theology is not accurate, with the possible exception of the time of the triumvirate.
All of this, again is historical perception.
In fact, this post has nothing to do with landmarkism. I have engaged in it because it seemed to me that you were “adopting” Bill Dodson as a Landmarker. I will ask him Monday what his feelings are, and as I stated earlier, no matter his response, he has served the SBC with distinction and derserves thanks.
art rogers
on Feb 26th, 2006
@ 3:30 pm:
Ben,
I just got off the phone with Bill Dodson. He says he knows you and thinks alot of you – says your a sharp young man.
When I asked if he were a Landmarker, he just laughed. He said he had never even heard the term until he moved to Kentucky at 60 years of age. He told me to quote him in saying, “I do not consider myself to be Landmark.” He says that he now has all of Pendleton’s books and understands it well, now.
I pressed him further, asking him the specific doctrinal issues of closed communion and alien immersion. he said that he has never practiced closed communion and knew of only one church in Western Kentucky that has – it still does.
As to alien immersion, he said that they would accept any baptism from a church that is like faith and order, “regardless of denominational affiliation,” and on the assurance that they were a christian when they were immersed.
As to the dating of my church and its policies, I asked our church historian about them. She confirmed for me that I was right in understanding these policies had not been in effect in many decades. In fact, she questioned whether we ever practised closed communion, saying that she didn’t remember doing so and that it has never appeared in the documents of the church. She is in her 80′s. As to alien immersion, she said she doesn’t remember it arising either, and a lady near the conversation said that she joined the church in the 70′s from a different denomination and was not re-baptized.
So, with all grace, I must say that your description of the history of our church, the area and of Bill Dodson as Landmarkish is inaccurate.
Ben Stratton
on Feb 27th, 2006
@ 8:51 am:
Bro. Rogers,
Good to hear from you again. I have enjoyed our exchanges. It is interesting to get feedback from others about things such as historical theology and regional history. Having said that I’m not sure you understand some of the things I am saying. Here is what I believe historically:
1. That Logan / Todd Association has strong Landmark roots and even today has a Landmark presence in both former associations. This Landmark presence is not as strong as it was 30 years ago, but is stronger than you probably realize. I never meet to say the association was totally Landmark today.
2. Some tenets of Landmarkism were once present in FBC, Russellville. By this I mean there was once a time when FBC rejected non-Baptist immersions and practiced close communion. (I am sure you understand the distinction between closed and close communion) I have never read your church’s history, so I guessed at the dates this changed. I still think I was pretty close. The reason for this is totally open communion was very rare among Southern Baptist churches in Kentucky before WWII. As to the baptism issue, I have a newspaper article from the early 1960′s showing when the first Southern Baptist church in Elkhorn (Lexington, KY) Association received alien immersion. I figured your church wasn’t too far from this date. It may have been the late 1960′s or perhaps the early 1970′s.
3. Landmarkism in general. I totally agree that Pendelton, Graves, and Dayton, promoted and spread Landmark ideas throughout the south. However I contend that all the tenets of Landmarkism existed before their day and were more widespread before their day than most people realize. Of course not all Baptists before their day accepted these things, but a good many did. This is not something I am basing on a single Baptist history class I took, but from hours of personal research I have done.
4. Bro. Bill Dodson. I will call Bro. Dodson myself this week. However let me say that only one of your three comments about Bro. Dodson surprises me. I had two different Southern Baptist professors in Bible Colleges that both totally agreed with Landmark ecclesiology. One of the men was proud to be called a Landmarker, while the other denied the name, believing it only applied to independent Baptists. Both these men were good friends and totally agreed on the doctrine of the church. As to his quote on alien immersion, I agree. My rejection of non-Baptist immersion is not based on their denominational identity, but on their faith and order or lack there of. The Lord’s Supper is the only quote I do not understand. Perhaps you misunderstood him. In my 28 years of life, I have been a member of 5 Southern Baptist churches (2 in Logan / Todd Association and 2 I have pastored) and 4 of them practiced closed communion and I know of dozens more that do.
Bro. Rogers you have not offended me in anything you have said and I hope I have not offended you. I have enjoyed our conversations. Even on history, “iron sharpens iron”.
art rogers
on Feb 27th, 2006
@ 10:00 am:
Ben,
This has drawn out much further than I cared to go, so I will wrap up this discussion by saying that I think your perceptions are skewed by your predispositions. While I am not offended, I am growing weary of repeating myself. Still, I will reiterate: I am not so ill informed as you suppose.
I simply state again, I think you are wrong. You obviously disagree, and that is your prerogative, but I deal with ministers here every day and I, and my church historian, know this church better than you.
1. Yes, Logan and Todd counties have strong Landmark roots. I have never disputed that. They are not as strong as you make them out to be today. Period. They just aren’t.
2. FBC, Russellville has not had a shadow of Landmarkism in it for MANY years. If it were ever much of an issue, you would have to go back to the turn of the century. I am done defending this, though. If you think you know our church better, you can take it up with our church historian who has been attending here since she was born and a member here since her profession of faith.
Let me go a step further. As to the 60′s, when you claim we were Landmarkish, we had a woman deacon. We were a tick liberal in that day, especially for that day, though we are not anything like that now. Your perception of our church history is revisionist. It just ain’t so.
3. Again, your personal research has not overturned the weight of scholarly research that has been done throughout the last century. You are predisposed to have us Landmark, which is your prerogative, but it colors you perceptions. I again reject the premise that we are landmark and that it was much of anything before the triumvirate.
4. I did not misunderstand Bill, he repeated it to me in different ways at several different times. He told me point blank that when he serves the Lord’s Supper, he explains what it is, and then it is up to every man’s conscience as to whether or not they participate. This is truly open communion. He knows what it is. What he said about other churches is what it is. I didn’t misunderstand what he was saying. I think maybe you have.
As to “like faith and order” I think you misunderstand that. he told me that he simply sat down with the professor and went through their experience, making sure that what they believed was the same and if it was they received their baptism, regardless of denomination.
In the end, though, I must say, I reject your persistant coloring of who we are as Landmark and I reject your assertion that I don’t know what I am talking about concerning Landmarkism. I understand it and reject it.
Moreover, I will say to you plainly what I have hinted at before: having a little history on your side (especially when it is disputable) doesn’t make you right. You being on Scripture’s side makes you right, and Landmarkism is a poor exogesis of Scripture.
If you want to debate that, you will have to go elsewhere. This blog is not about Landmarkism. If you want to discuss it, set up your own blog about it and I may join you there.
Of course, if I were to post on Landmarkism, then it would be appropriate for you to discuss it here. Thsi post has nothing to do with it, though the comment section has become dominated by the topic. I just felt you were rewriting history and turning Bill Dodson into a Landmarker, and I wasn’t sure that was accurate. After checking my facts, I am confident that I was right.
Ben Stratton
on Feb 27th, 2006
@ 5:35 pm:
Bro. Rogers,
I apologize for taking this particular blog off topic. My original post was simply to add my recommendation to Bro. Dodson’s announcement. I will make this my last comment on the subject.
I talked to a pastor in your association today who has served both Logan and Bethel Association churches for over 20 years. He confirmed what I said about a strong Landmark presence on the ordinances remaining in a good number of churches. While the word “Landmark” may never come up in board meetings or personal conversations, I assure you the undercurrents are there in more than a handful of churches. I also talked to Bro. Dodson on the phone today and to put it simply, he remains the B.H. Carroll of Graves County Association.
I enjoy reading and studying history, especially regional Baptist history, but I base my personal beliefs on the Bible, not on history. My intent was never to debate doctrine or the Bible with you.
Stuart
on Feb 27th, 2006
@ 5:40 pm:
I would like to ask Ben, even if it is the case that several churches in western Kentucky have abandoned Landmark ecclesiology, HOW does it logically follow from that example that we live in an age when “so many Baptist pastors have compromised their doctrinal beliefs…”
Surely you don’t equate sound doctrine soley with Landmarkism any more than you would equate the entire scope of “Baptist pastors” with a handful in one part of one state.
art rogers
on Feb 28th, 2006
@ 10:07 am:
Ben,
Thank yoy for your congenial tone and for the support for Bill Dodson.
Finally, I will say for the last time… I know the tenets of Landmarkism and can recognize them whether they call it by name or not. My own perspectives are different, by far, than the assertions of you and your friend. they are what they are.