It was pointed out to me yesterday, that the current issue of SBC Life not only contains a controversial article by Bobby Welch, but also has Bobby on the cover. It is, in fact, rife with Bobby Welch, through and through.
Meanwhile, our current President, Frank Page, gets less space and less wording than Bobby’s now infamous missive – on the same page.
Why is it that the vision for the future of the convention is still being articulated by our past president in this convention publication?
I am not claiming conspiracy, here, so everybody relax.
My point is this: The structure of the SBC needs to let go of the Bobby Welch years and get on board with Frank Page.
He was elected by an overwhelming margin by this convention. Any implication that this vote was not a mandate must be a view governed by predispositions that prevent veiwing him in this way.
He won a majority on the first ballot against two other candidates. That is a mandate.
Also, one would have to have been absolutely closed minded not to have been able to read the mood of the room in Greensboro as overwhelmingly pro-Wade Burleson, pro-CP giving and anti-politics as usual.
Time to move on. Frank Page is President and the publications and structure of the SBC needs to get in line with him and the SBC messengers that elected him.
What do you think?
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
Wade Burleson
on Aug 10th, 2006
@ 2:11 pm:
I think you have rung the proverbial bell.
Go back and look at the last 16 years of SBC Life and look at the first issue after the election of a new President. It is an issue dominated by the introduction of the new Prez, interviews with him, a focus on his ministry, his family, his philosophy . . .
Art, somebody high up needs to ask somebody high up in charge of SBC LIFE (and I know who both higher ups are)
“What were you thinking?”
I agree. There is no conspiracy, but some very bizarre shortsightedness. In addition, there is no way in this world Welch’s letter should have ever been published. Period.
Denise
on Aug 10th, 2006
@ 2:47 pm:
HERE, HERE
“CLINK CLINK” with my glass of water of course :) :)
IN HIS NAME
on Aug 10th, 2006
@ 4:02 pm:
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
art rogers
on Aug 10th, 2006
@ 4:13 pm:
Wayne, (In His Name)
I am sorry, but the top of your comment ascribed certain actions to Satan.
I agreed with the rest of your post and I am sure you meant to say that Satan was taking advantage of conflict, but I don’t want anything misconstrued.
I really hope you will repost your comment with this thought in mind.
Thanks,
Art
IN HIS NAME
on Aug 10th, 2006
@ 7:42 pm:
Our new President Frank Page wants UNITY of which would be something NEW to the SBC.
We all know our New President has a HEART for Missions and that is another reason He was elected.
SAD that the powers that control the PRESS don’t want the New SBC President Frank Page to Shine for JESUS.
A Brother in CHRIST
Kevin Bussey
on Aug 10th, 2006
@ 8:47 pm:
Amen! U da man!
Let’s move on!
Bob Cleveland
on Aug 11th, 2006
@ 9:23 am:
Art (did I ever tell you my only sibling was named Art?):
My older son would call this a BFO. Brilliant Flash of the Obvious. Which, apparently, no one else noticed.
Amen, brother. Great post.
Timmy
on Aug 11th, 2006
@ 10:43 am:
Mega dittos.
Bob Cleveland
on Aug 12th, 2006
@ 9:43 am:
AND .. one of the BFO’s was that Frank Page did, indeed, have a mandate. 50+ to 49+ in a 2-way race is one thing. What it really was, though, was something like 50 to 25 over either other candidate.
I wouldn’t imagine those who were “against” Frank Page would want that pointed out.